
aass_ii^4iX — 

Book__,_C^ijl 



OKl-"ie:iAl. uoNArioN. 



I 



Water-supply and Irrigation Paper No. 92 Series M, General HydrograpMe Investigations, 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY 

CHARLES D. WALCOTT, Director 



THE PASSAIC FLOOD OF 1903 



BY 



MARSHALL ORA LEIGHTON 




WASHINGTON 

GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 

1904 



PUBLICATIONS OF UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY. 

The nubliofltions of the United States Geological Survey consist of (1) Annual Reports; (Jj 
Monographs C^) Profe.^ional Papers; (4) Bulletins; (5) Mineral Resources; (6) Water-supply and 
Irrigation Papers; (7) Topographic Atlas of United States, folios and separate sheets thereof; (8) 
SSc Atla. of Unied States, folios thereof. The classes numbered -2. 7, and 8 are sold at cost of 
publication; the others are distributed free. A circular gi^-ing complete list^ may be had on 

""^ThrBunetins, Professional Papers, and Water-Supply Papers treat of a variety of subjects, and 
the tot.vl number issued is large. They have therefore been classified into *;^« f«"°;^''"^;;";^;,^• 
Economic geology; B, Descriptive geology; C, Systematic geology and paleontology; D. Petrography 
and n,ineralogy; E, Chemistry and physics; F, Geography; G, Miscellaneous; H, Forestry; I. Irriga- 
tion- J Water storage; K. Pumping water; L, Quality of water; M, General hydrographic investi- 
gation- N Water power; O, Underground waters; P. Hydrographic progress reports. The following 
SterXply Papers are out of stock, and can no longer be supplied: Nos. W^^^ 
Complete Tists of series I to P follow. (WS=Water-Supply Paper; B=Bulletm; PP= Professional 

Paper.) 

Series I— Irrigation. 

W8 2 Irrigation near Phoenix, Ariz., by A. P. Davis. 1897. 98 pp., 31 pis. and maps, 

WS 5. Irrigation practice on the Great Plains, by E. B. Cowgill. 1897. 39 pp., U pls. 

WS 9. Irrigation near Greeley, Colo., by David Boyd. 1897. 90 pp., 21 pis. 

WS 10. Irrigation in Mesilla Valley, New Mexico, by F. C. Barker. 1898. 51 pp., 11 pis. 

WS 13. Irrigation systems in Texas, by W. F. Hutson. 1898. 68 pp., 10 pis. 

WS 17 Irrigation near Bakersfleld, Cal., by C. E. Grunsky. 1898. 96 pp., 16 pis. 

WS 18 Irrigation near Fresno, Cal., by C. E. Grunsky. 1898. 9-1 pp., 11 pis. 

WS 19. Irrigation near Merced, Cal., by C. E. Grunsky. 1899. 59 pp., 11 pis. 

WS 23 Water -right problems of Bighorn Mountains, by El wood Mead. 189<.). 62 pp., . pis. 

WS 32. Water resources of Porto Rico, by II. M. Wilson. 1899. 48 pp., 17 pis. and maps. 

WS 43. Conveyance of water in irrigation canals, flumes, and pipes, by Samuel Fortier. 1901. h6 

pp., 15 pis. , ,., -v. 

WS70. Geology and water resources of the Patrick and Goshen Hole quadrangles. Wyoming, by 

O. I. Adams. 1902. 50 pp., 11 pis. 
WS 71. Irrigation systems of Texas, by T. U. Taylor. 1902. 137 pp.. 9 pis. 
WS 74 Water resources of the State of Colorado, by A. L. Fellows. 1902. 1..1 M>.. 1 1 1 ^ 
WS 87. Irrigation in India (second edition), by H. M. Wilson. 1903. 238 pp., 27 pis. 

The following papers also relate especially to irrigation: Irrigation in India, by H.NI. Wilson, in 
Twelfth Annual, Pt. II; two papers on irrigation engineering, by H. M. Wilson, in Thirteenth 
Annual. Pt. 111. 

Series J— Water Storage. 

WS 33. Storage of water on Gila River, Arizona, by J. B. Lippincott. 1900. 98 pp., ;W pis. 

WS 40 The Austin dam, bv Thomas U. Taylor. 1900. 51 pp., 16 pis. 

WSI5 Water storage on Cache Creek, California, by A. E. Chandler. 1901. 48 pp., 10 pis. 

W8 46. Physical characteristics of Kern River, California, by F. H. Olmsted, and Reconnaissance of 

Yuba River, California, by Marsden Manson. 1901 . 57 pp., 8 pis. 
W6 58. Storage of water on Kings River, Califoniia, by J. B. Lippincott. 1902. 100 pp., 32 pis 
W8 I*. Water storage in Truckee Basin, California-Nevada, by L. H. Taylor. 1902. 90 pp., 8 pis. 
WS 73. Water storage on Salt River, Arizona, by A. P. Davis. 1902. 54 pp., 25 pis. 
WS m. Storage reservoirs of Stony Creek. California, by Burt Cole. 1903. 62 pp., 16 pis. 
WS 89. Water resources of Salinas Valley, California, by Homer Hamlin. 1903. - pp., 12 pis. 

The following paper also should be noted under lh\^ '— ■'; R...,.rv.,ir. f.,r irriu-atiou. by 

Schuyler, in Eighteenth Annual, Pt. IV. 

[Continued on third pugo ol eovcr.J 
IRK 92—2 



.J.D^ 



Water-Supply aud Irrigation Paper No. 92 Series M, General Hydrographic Investigations, 8 

DEPAKTiMENT OF THK INTERIOR 

UNITED 8TATE8 GEOLOCilC'AL SURVEY 

CHAKLKS I). WALCOTT, Dikectok 



[HE PASSAIC FLOOD OF 1003 



BY 



MARSHALL ORA LEIGHTON 




WASHINGTON 

GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 

19 04 



CONTENTS. 



Page. 

Letter of transmittal 7 

Introduction 9 

Precipitation * 11 

Descent of flood 14 

Highland tributaries and Central Basin 14 

Flood at Macopin dam 15 

Flood at Beattie's dam, Little Falls 16 

Flood flow over Dundee dam 17 

Damages 23 

General statements 23 

Highland trilmtaries 23 

Ramapo River 23 

Pequanac and Wanatjue rivers 24 

Central Basin 25 

Lower valley 25 

Paterson 26 

Passaic and vicinity 27 

Preventive measures 28 

General discussion 28 

Lower valley improvements 29 

Flood catchment 31 

Pompton reservoir 31 

Ramapo system 33 

Wanaque system 34 

Mid vale reservoir 34 

Ringwood reservoir 35 

West Brook reservoir. 35 

Pequanac system ■. ^ ^_ 35 

Newfoundland reservoir 36 

Stickle Pond reservoir 36 

Rockaway system 37 

Powerville reservoir 37 

Longwood Valley reservoir 37 

Splitrock Pond 38 

Ul)per Passaic Basin 38 

Millington reservoir 38 

Saddle River 39 

Sunmiary of flood-catchments projects 40 

Preferable reservoir sites 40 

General conclusions 44 

Index 47 

3 



ILLUSTRATIONS. 



, Page. 

Plate I. A, Beattie's dam, Little Falls, N. J., in flood; B, Flood-water lines in 

residence district, Paterson, N. J 16 

,y ' ' 

II. A, Pompton Lakes dam and water front of Ludlum Steel and Iron 

Coniiiany; B, Dry bed of Pompton Lake 24 

III. Flood district of Paterson, N. J 24 

IV. A, Washout at Spruce street, Paterson, N. J.; B, River street, Pater- 

son, N. J., after flood 26 

^ V. .1, Effects of flood in mill district, Paterson, N. J. ; B, The wreck of a 

hotel in Paterson, N. J 26 

VI. .1, Devastation in Hebrew quarter, Paterson, N. J.; B, A common 

example of flood damage 28 

VII. A, Inundated lands at Passaic, N. J.; B, Undamaged bridge across 

Passaic River after partial subsidence of flood 28 

Fi(i. 1. Comparative flood run-off at Dundee dam, March, 1902, and October, 

1903 18 

2. Diagram of flood flow at Dundee dam, flood of 1903 20 

5 



LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL. 



Department of the Interior, 
United States Geological Survey, 

HYDROGRAnilC BrANCTI, 

WasMnr/ton, D. C, Decemljer J^^ 1003. 
Sir: I have tho honor to transmit herewith a manuscript entitled, 
"Passaic Flood of 1903,''' prepared by Marshall Ora Leigliton, and to 
request that it be published as one of the series of Water-Supply and 
Irrigation Papers. 

This paper i.s a continuation of Water-Supply and Irrigation Paper 
No. '^'^^ by Georg-e B. Hollister and Mr. Leighton, and describes the 
flood of October, 1903, which was higher and far more disastrous than 
the flood of 1902. The occurrence of two great floods in the same 
basin during so short a period makes the subject worthy of attention, 
especially as the district is, from a manufacturing and commercial 
standpoint, one of the most important along the Atlantic coast. 
Very respectfully, 

F. H. Newell, 

Chief Engineer. 
Hon. Charles D. Walcott, 

Director United Statef< Geological Survei/. 



I 



THE PASSATG FLOOD OF 1903. 



By Marshall O. Leighton. 



INTHODITCTIOIS". 

In the followino^ pa^^es is given a brief histoiy of the disastrous 
flood which occurred in the Passaic River Basin in October, 1903. 
In the report Ijy George Buell Hollister and the writer, entitled 
"The Passaic Flood of 1902," and published by the United States 
Geological Survey as Water-Supply and Irrigation Paper No. 88, are 
discussed the principal ph^^siographic features of the drainage basin 
and their general relations to the stream flow. This report will not 
repeat this information, and the discussion will be confined to the flood 
itself. References to local features will be made without explanation, 
the presumption being' that this publication shall accompany the earlier 
one and be, as it is, a continuation of it. In the present report more 
attention is given to an estimate of damages than in the earlier work, 
and remedies l)y which devastation may be avoided are briefly 
considered. 

Passaic River overflowed its banks on October 8, 1903, and remained 
in flood until October 19. Between these dates there occurred the 
greatest and most destructive flood ever known along this stream. 
Ordinarily the channel of the lower Passaic at full bank carries about 
12,000 cubic feet of water per second, but at the height of this flood it 
carried about 35,700 cubic feet per second. 

The flood period for the entire stream can not be exactly stated, as 
the overflow did not occur at the same time in difl'erent parts of the 
basin. For example, the gage-height records at Dundee dam show 
that the flood began to rise on October 8 at 6.30 a. m., and reached a 
maximum of 9^ inches over the dam crest at 9 p. m. on October 10. 
Similarly, on Beattie's dam at Little Falls the flood began to rise at 
midnight on Octol)er 7, and reached its maximum at 2 p. m. on Octo- 
ber 10, or al)out thirty-eight hours after the initial rise, the height of 
the water being 1.29 inches over the crest of the dam. 

The flood rose on the highland tri])utaries as follows: On Ramapo 
River the flood crest passed Hillborn at about 10 a. m. on October 9 

9 



10 THE PASSAIC FLOOD OF 1003. [no. 92. 

and reached Pompton,at the mouth of the vivcn-, shortly after noon of 
the same day. 

The hio-licst reading recorded on the Geological Survey gage at 
the feeder of Morris Canal, in Pompton Plains, was 14.3 feet, at about 
6 o'clock on the morning of Octol)er 10. As this gage is read only 
once daily it is proljable that this reading does not represent the 
height of the flood crest. Evidence shows that it passed this point on 
the previous day. Records of the Newark Avater department show 
that the flood on Pequanac River began to rise at Macopin dam on 
October 8 at noon, and rose rapidly to the maximum of 6,000 cubic 
feet per second at -1 p. m. on October 10. 

No records are availa))le with reference to the ri.se of flood on 
Wanaque River. 

Observations made on Pompton Plains on the morning of the 11th 
show that Pompton River was well within its ])anks at that time; 
therefore the Ramapo, Wanaque, and Pequanac must have discharged 
their flood waters some time previous to this hour. The fact is impor- 
tant when considered in connection with the height of water in the 
main stream at that period. This observation was made onl}^ eighteen 
hours after the maximum height over Beattie's dam at Little Falls, 
and twelve hours after the flood crest passed Dundee dam. The con- 
ditions here outlined illustrate the rapidity with which flood waters are 
discharged from the Pompton drainage area, and the deterring efl'ect 
of Great Piece Meadows upon the flood. 

The rise of the flood on Rockaway River at Old Poonton was almost 
coincident with that on Pequanac River at Macopin dam. The maxi- 
mum flow occurred fourteen hours later than the maxinuuii on the 
Ramapo at Pompton. 

The flood crest did not reach Chatham on upper Passaic River until 
the morning of October 11, or about twenty-four hours later than the 
flood heights in Pompton and Rockawa}^ rivers, and about tweh'e 
hours later than the maximum over Dundee dam. 

Adequate reasons for these difl'erences in flood periods between 
neighboring points are abundant. They are apparent after a review of 
the physiogra])hic conditions described in Water-Supi)ly Paper No. SS. 

The flood of 11*03 was the inunediate n^sult of an enormous i-ainfall, 
and not, as is often the case in north temperate latitudes, the com- 
bined efl'ect of rainfall and the ra])id melting of accumulated snows. 
The records of weather-observation stations in northern New rlersey 
and New York fail to show, throughout their entire ol)scrvation 
periods, as great an amount of precipitation in so short a period. 
The storm which was the immediate cause of the flood occurred princi- 
pally between October 8 and 1 1. During that intei-val rain fell to an 
average depth of 11.74 inches over the l*assaic Basin. 



LEIGHTON.] 



PRECIPITATION. 



11 



The Passaic Basin is fairly well supplied with storao-e facilities, 
which, under ordinar}^ circumstances, would temper the severit}' of 
floods by holding- back a large amount of water. In this case no such 
effect was produced, as the reservoirs, lakes, and ponds on the drain- 
age area were tilled, or practically so, at the beginning of the storm, 
and there was consequently no available space in which to hold back 
even an appreciable part of the run-off water. Over some of the 
dams in the highland region a comparatively small amount of water 
was l)eing discharged at the beginning of the storm. Therefore, 
while these storage basins may have had a certain deterring effect 
upon the rate of flood accumulation, they could not, in the end, assist 
materially in preventing damages in the lower part of the drainage 
area. 

PRECIPITATION^. 

The precipitation records for June, July, August, and September 
arc given l)elow: 



Precipitation, in inches 


in Pn 


ssa/t; Valleij and vicinihj 


, June 


In September, 1903. 




June. 


July. 


August. 


September. 




Nor- 
mal. 


01)- 
scrvert. 


Nor- 
mal. 


Ob- 
served. 


Nor- 
mal. 


Ob- 
served. 


Nor- 
mal. 


Ob- 
served. 


Highland region: 


















Dov'^er 


3.29 


15. 02 
12.80 


5. 54 
6.42 


5.47 
7.59 


5.08 
5.16 


9.04 
9. 35 


4.02 
4. 60 


3.39 


Chester 


8. 48 




Charlotteliuro: 


3. 52 


9.45 


5.54 


3.97 


4.98 


7.78 


4.80 


3.29 


Ringwoofl 




10.13 




3.08 




6.17 




3.06 


Red Sandstone plain: 


















Paterson 


4.31 
3. 32 


11.17 


5.32 
5.23 


5.40 
5.40 


4.31 
5.20 


10. 89 
9.40 


4. 86 
4.52 


2.88 


Hanover 




River Vale 


3.17 
3. 08 


10. 62 


4.87 
7. 03 


3.41 


4.17 
5. 95 




3. 61 
3. 67 


2.90 


Essex Fells 


1.80 


Newark 


3.60 


11. 51 


4.48 


4.27 


4. 75 


14.54 


3. 83 


4.56 


South Orange 


3.57 


9.28 


5.43 


4.22 


5. 05 


13. 75 


4.04 


3.80 


New York City 


3. 13 


7.42 


4.26 


3. 23 


4.70 


5. 96 


3.72 


2. 60 


Plainfield 


3.02 
3 68 


10.14 
8. 76 


5.86 
5.74 


4.70 
4.31 


4.37 
4.26 


6. 87 
7.15 


4.42 
4.14 


7.10 


Klizabeth 


4.38 









An examination of the above table shows that throughout the 
summer of 1903 the precipitation was considerably above normal. 
The records for June and August indicate extremely wet months, and 
the July figures are slightly al)ove while the September figures are 
somewhat below normal. The important fact shown by this table is 



12 



THE PASSAIC FLOOD OF 1903. 



[NO. 92. 



that disastrous floods may occur after long periods of abundant rains. 
It has been observed that heavy precipitation may be expected after 
protracted periods of drought. Such a belief is not altogether fan- 
ciful. In the northeastern part of this countr}' the total amount of 
precipitation is approximately uniform from 3'ear to year. The vari- 
ations, comparatively speaking, are not ver}^ wide, and we are there- 
fore led to expect that there are in operation influences which serve 
to compensate for excesses or deficiencies in our annual rainfall. 
Therefore after the abundant precipitation of the summer of 1903, an 
observer might have had some measure of justitication in predicting a 
normally or abnormally dry fall. In view of the actual events the 
fact must be emphasized that in adopting measures to prevent floods 
the margin of safety must be extremely wide. The extraordinary 
rainfall of those three October days can not with assurance be accepted 
as the maxinmm. 



Precipitation, in inches, in Passaic Valley and vicinity, October 7 to 11, 190S. 



Station. 


From— 


To- 


Amount. 


Day. 


Hour. 


Day. 


Hour. 


Highland region: 

Dover 


1 

7 
7 
s 

1 

S 
8 
8 
8 




11 

11 

10 

9 

9 
U 

9 
11 
10 


9 p. Ill 

7 a. Ill 

8 |). til 

;?. 45 p. in . . 
() i>. Ill 

4 J), ni 

5 a. Ill 

Night 


10.13 


Little Falls 

Charlottebnrg 


4 a. ni 


14.13 
12. (w 


Ringwood 


11 a. ni 

5 a. Ill 

8 a. ni 


10. ()3 


Rod Sandstone plain: 

Paterson 


15. 04 


River Vak^ . 


12. 55 


Essex F'ells 


10. 66 


Newark . 


8. 30 a. m . . 
6 n. Ill 


12.09 


South Orange 


10.48 



The extremely rapid rate of precipitation during the crucial part of 
the storm is shown l)y the recording gages placed at observation 
stations in Newark and New York Cit}'. 



LEIGHTOX.] 



PRECIPITATION. 



13 



Hourly records of precipitation at Nciv York 

Inches. 
Oct. 8, !) to 10 a. in 0. 08 

10 to 11 a. m 02 

11 to 12 m. 32 

12 111. to 1 p. m 10 

lto2p. m 05 

2 to 3 p. m 06 

3 to 4 p. m 34 

4 to 5 p. m 01 

5 to 6 p. m 10 

6 to 7 p. m 02 

7 to 8 p. m 93 

8 to 9 p. m 32 

9 to 10 p. Ill 24 

10 to 11 p. m 27 

11 to 12 p. m 26 

9, 12 to la. m 30 

Hourly record of precipitation at Newark 

Inches. 
Oct. 8, 8.25 to 9 a. m 0. 05 

9 to 10 a. m 04 

10 to 11 a. m 00 

11 to 12 111 00 

12 111. to 1 J). Ill 14 

1 to 2 p. Ill 72 

2 to 3 p. Ill .49 

3 to 4 p. Ml 11 

4 to 5 ]). Ill 1. 05 

5 to G p. Ill 45 

6 to 7 p. Ill 1.20 

7 to 8 p. Ill 60 

8 to 9 p. m 24 

9 to 10 p. m 24 

10 to 11 p. Ill 13 

11 to 12 p. Ill 17 

9, 12 to 1 a. m 29 

lto2a. m 33 

2 to 3 a. m 62 

3 to 4 a.m. 29 

4 to 5 a. m 35 

5 to 6 a. m 26 

6 to 7 a. m 13 



observation fttatio)i, Octohcr S and H, 1903. 

Inches. 
Oct. 9, 1 to 2 a. Ill 0. 25 

2 to 3 a. Ill 75 

3 to 4 a. m 34 

4 to 5 a. m 46 

5 to 6 a. Ill 41 

6 to 7 a. m 29 

7 to 8 a. Ill 51 

8 to 9 a. m 1.38 

9 to 10 a. m 1.04 

10 to 11 a. m 08 

11 to 12 m 23 

12 m. to 1 p. Ill 24 

lto2p. m 31 

2 to 3 p. Ill 32 

3 to 4 p. m 01 

Total 6. 92 

observation station, October S-11, 1903. 

Inches. 
Oct. 9, 7 to 8 a. m 0. 29 

8 to 9 a. m 69 

9 to 10 a. m 69 

10 to 11 a. Ill 39 

11 to 12 m 20 

12 111. to 1 p. m 39 

lto2p. m 28 

2 to 3 p. m 34 

3 to 3.25 p. m .13 

11.50 to 11.55 p. Ill 01 

10, 3 to 4 a. m 02 

7 to 8 p. m 07 

8 to 9 p. m 09 

9 to 10 p.m... 02 

10 to 11 p. m 04 

11 to 12 p. Ill 04 

11, 12 to 1 a. m 06 

lto2a, m 09 

2 to 3 a. m 03 

3 to 4 a. m 05 

4 to 5 a. m 01 



Total 11.83 



14 THE PASSAIC FLOOD OF 1903. [no. 92. 

From the iibovc tables it ma}^ bo seen that the maxiumiii rate of 
precipitation per hour was 1.38 inches at New York and 1.2 inches at 
NcAvark. Coni^jarLson of the tal)le,s on pao-es 11 and 12 gives an excel- 
lent idea of the intensity of the storm. The amount of water falling- in 
a single storm is nearl}' equal to the total for June, a month of unusual 
precipitation. 

The a\'erage of the total amounts of precipitation recorded at the 
various stations in the Passaic area is 11.74 inches. These totals arc 
fairly uniform, none of them varying wideh' from the average. There- 
fore the figure 11.74 represents a conservative mean for a calculation 
of total amount of water over the drainage area. Assuming this as 
the correct depth, the amount of water which fell on each square mile 
of the Passaic drainage area during the storm Avas 27,273,000 cubic 
feet, or for the whole Passaic drainage area over 27,000,000,000 cubic 
feet, weighing about 852,000,000 tons. This amount of water would, 
if properl}' stored, fill a lake with twent}' times the capacity of Green- 
wood Lake, would cover Central Park in New York City, which has 
an area of about 1.5 square miles, to a height of 645 feet, and, at the 
present rate of water consumption in the cit}^ of Newark, N. J., would 
supply the city with water for twenty years. 

DESCENT OF FLOOD. 

HIGHLAND TRIBUTARIES AND CENTRAL BASIN. 

A description of the descent of flood waters from the highland 
tributaries into the (Jentral Basin has been given in Water-vSupi)ly 
Paper No. 88. It has been shown that the lands of the Central Basin 
are covered even in ordinary freshets, and that in the event of a great 
flood the waters merely rise higher, l)eing, for the greater extent, 
almost quiescent, and beyond the flooding of houses and barns and the 
destruction of crops, little damage is done. In other words, the flood 
along this portion is not torrential in character. 

During the flood of 1903 the water fell so quickly all over this basin, 
and was collected so rapidly ])y the small tributaries, that a lake was 
formed at once Avhich served as a cushion against which the raging 
torrent of the highland tributaries spent itself without doing extraor- 
clinary damage in that immediate region. Bridges which might liavc 
been lost in a smaller flood like that of li>02 Avere actually standing 
in slack water ])y the time the mountain torrents appeared in force. 
These streams caused nnich destruction higher up in the mountains, 
but in the Central Basin their energy became potential — a gathering 
of forces to be loosed upon the loAver valley. A discussion of the 
eff'ects of this Avill be taken u\) under the heading "Damages." 

In Watcr-JSupply Paper No. 88 is given the proportion of flood waters 



LEiGHTON.] DESCENT OF FLOOD. 15 

contril)utecl to the Central Ba«in by each of the tri))utarie«. These 
figures were computed from the results of gaj^'inos maintained for a 
period sufficient to afford this information within a reasonal)le approxi- 
mation. In the case of the storm which resulted in the flood of 1903 
it is probable that data referred to can not be safely applied. 

The flood of 1902 was the result of abundant rains following- upon 
and melting a heavy snow. Weather Bureau records show that 
neither the depth of the snow nor the amount of sul)sequent rainfall 
was uniform, or even approximately so, over the Passaic drainage 
area. Indeed, so marked was the variation that it was believed that 
the mean rainfall for ail the observation stations on the basin did not 
bear sufficient relation to observed run-ofl' to allow of an}^ relia])le 
deductions. In the case of the October storm, however, the distribu- 
tion of rainfall was more nearly uniform, and the run-ofl' from the 
highland tributaries into the Central Basin must have been propor- 
tionately dift'erent in amount from that indicated in the upland tribu- 
tary tal)les in the report of the previous flood. The data given for 
the 1902 flood can not, therefore, in the case of the highland tribu- 
taries, be applied to the conditions which obtained in the flood of 1903. 

FLOOD AT MACOPIN DAM. ' 

Mr. Morris R. Shcrrcrd, engineer of the Newark city water board, 
has furnished flow computations over Macopin intake dam, w hich is the 
head of the Newark pipe line. As about 73 per cent of the Pequanac 
drainage area lies above this intake, the table on page 16 shows roughly 
an equivalent percentage of the flow contributed ])y Pequanac River 
to the Central Basin of the Passaic. In consulting this table it should 
be borne in mind that the entire run-ofl' of the drainage area above 
Macopin is aljout 25,000,000 gallons per day more than the amounts 
presented in this table. All reservoirs and ponds connected with the 
conservancy system of the Newark water supply were filled except 
that at Oakridge, which was about 1.5 feet below the crest of the 
spillway. 



16 



THE PASSAIC FLOOD OF 1903. 



[NO. 92. 



Flon' of Pajiumdc Eiver over Macojjin dam, Oclvbcr 1-24, 1003. 
[From Newark water department.] 
Cubic feet. 



Oct. 8, 6 a. in. to 12m 240, 600 

12 111. to 4 p. Ill 347,600 

4 to 6 1). lu 842, 200 

8-9, 6 p. m. to 6 a. m. . 40, 110, 000 

9, 6 a. m. to 12 in . . . : . 51, 870, 000 

12 m. to 1 p. m 15, 100, 000 

1 to 5 p. ni 62, 430, 000 

5 to 10 p. Ill 89, 040, 000 

10 to 11 p. m 19, 520, 000 

9-10, 10 p. 111. to 8 a. 111. 201, 350, 000 

10, 8 a. m. to 12 m 75, 670, 000 

12 m. to 6 p. m 103, 650, 000 

6 to 12 p. m 73, 530, 000 

11, 12 to 6 a. m 56,820,000 

6 a. m. to 12 m 41, 440, 000 

12 m. to 6 p. m 32,755,000 

6 to 12 p. m 25, 665, 000 

12, 12 to 6 a. m 23, 800, 000 

6 a. m. to 12 m 20,725,000 

12 m. to 6 p. m 18,450,000 

6 to 12 p. m 15, 105, 000 

13, 12 to 6 a. m 13, 370, 000 

6 a. m. to 12 111 11,890,000 

12 m. to 6 p. m 11, 230, 000 

6 to 12 p. m 11,230,000 



Cubic feet. 

Oct. 14, 12 to 6 a. m 9, 626, 000 

6 a. 111. to 12 m 8, 690, 000 

12 111. to 6 p. Ill 8,022,000 

6 to 12 J), m 7, 353, 000 

15, 12 to 6 a. m 6, 952, 000 

6 a. m. to 6 p. iii 12, 700, 000 

15-16, 6 p. m. to 6 a. m. 10, 965, 000 

16, 6 a. m. to 6 p. m 10, 025, 000 

16-17, 6 p. m. to 6 a. m . 9, 091, 000 

17, 6 a. m. to 6 p. m 8, 690, 000 

17-18, 6 p. m. to 6 a. m. 9, 893, 000 

18, 6 a. m. to 6 p. m 10,565,000 

18-19, 6 p. m. to 6 a. m. 8, 690, 000 

19, 6 a. m. to 6 p. m 6, 952, 000 

19-20, 6 p. m. to 6 a. m. 6, 150, 000 

20, 6 a. m. to 6 p. m 5, 882, 000 

20-21, 6 p. m. to 6 a. m. 5, 749, 000 

21, 6 a. m. to 6 p. m 5,481,000 

21-22, 6 p. m. to 6 a. m. 5, 214, 000 

22, 6 a. m. to 6 p. m 4, 144, 000 

22-23, 6 p. m. to 6 a. m. 3, 677, 000 

23, 6 a. m. to 6 p. m 3,877,000 

23-24, 6 p. m. to 6 a. m. 5. 749, 000 

24, 6 a. m. to 6 p. m 5, 615, 000 



n'a 



FLOOD AT BEATTIE'S DAM, LITTLE FALLS. 

The flow over Beattie's dam at Little Falls, litis })ooii mlculated 
accordino- to coefficients used for the same dam in Wator-Siipply 
Paper No. 88. Recorded gage heights show that over the main dam 
there was a maximum depth of 11.12 feet, which continued from 2 to 
8 p. m., on October 10, representing a niaxinuun flow of 31,f)75 cubic 
feet per second. (See PI. I, A.) In the following tal)le is set forth the 
flow of the river over Beattie's dam during the flood, and for purposes 
of comparison, the figures for the flood ])oriod of March, 1902. It 
should be borne in mind in consulting this tal)lc, that in the case of 
the flood of 1903 exact dates and hours are given, while the "figures for 
the 1902 flood represent flow determinations at six-hour intervals, 
beuinninir with the initial rise of that flood. 



li«MMI0«Mli 




.1. BEATTIE-S DAM, LITTLE FALLS, N. J., IN FLOOD. 




B FLOOD-WATER LINES IN RESIDENCE DISTRICT, PATERSON, N. J. 



I 

i 



DESCENT OF FLOOD. 



17 



Fluod flow uccr Bealtiex d<nn (Inriiiy Jiuods of J!>OJ dud li)Oo. 



Date and hour. 


1903. 


1902. « 


Date and hour. 


1903. 


1902. « 






Scc.-fect. 


Sec. -feel. 






Sec. -feet. 


Sec-feet. 


Oct. 8. 


12 p. in...! 


1,645 


490 


Oct. 14. 


12 m 


11, 740 


22, 650 


9. 


(5 a. in 


4, 235 


700 




6 p. m. .. 


10, 975 


22, 350 




12 m 


8, 560 


1,350 




12 p. 111.. 


9,820 


22, 100 




6 p. m 


15, 755 


2,120 


15. 


6 a. Ill . . . 


9,180 


21, 150 




12 p. m... 


23, 927 


3, 540 




12 m .... 


8,330 


19, 900 


10. 


6 a. m 


28, 370 


4,250 




6 p. m... 


7,700 


18, 900 




12 in 


31, 305 


4, 600 




12 p. 111.. 


7, 005 


17, 350 




(5 p. Ill 


31,675 


5,000 


16. 


6 a. m . . . 


6, 695 


15, 750 




12 p.m... 


30, 770 


6, 500 




12 m.... 


5,920 


13, 900 


11. 


6 a. m 


29, 840 


7,600 




6 p. m... 


5,620 


13, 300 




12m 


28, 950 


8,250 




12 p.m.. 


5,360 


11,800 




6 p. m 


26, 960 


9,000 


17. 


6 a. m . . . 


4, 855 


10, 650 




12 p.m... 


25,530- 


10, 200 




Below full bank 


8,900 


12 




24 435 


11 450 




Do. 




8,500 
8,100 




12 m 


22 625 


14, 700 




Do. 






6 p. m 

12 p.m... 


20, 810 


18, 150 




Do. 




8,200 




18, 655 
17 930 


20 650 




Do. 




7,000 


13 


22 200 




Do. 




6,250 




12 111 


16 190 


22, 700 




Do. 




5,900 




6 p. m 

12 p. m... 
6 a. m 


14 900 


23 400 




Do . 




5,300 




13 615 


23, 300 
22, 950 




Do. 




5,200 


14 


12, 340 




Do. 




4,900 







n At six-hour intervals. 



FLOOD FLOW OVER DUNDEE DAM. 

The flood, as indicated b}^ gage heiglits at Dundee dam, lasted from 
about 6.30 p. m. October 8 to about niidniglit October 18. Although 
the maximum recorded gage height was 19 inches higher than during 
the flood of 1902, the actual time during which the river was out of its 
baid<s was forty-five hours less than at the earlier flood. Examination 
of tig. 1 shows that the flood of 1908 was decidedl}' more intense than 
that of 190^2, the maximum height ))eing reached in 1!>03 in a])Out 
sixty hours, while in 1902 the maximum was not reached until the 
expiration of about or.e hundred and twenty hours. 

At Dundee dam the familiar break in the progress of the flood took 
place about thirty-five hours after the initial rise. It occurred before 
the time of tlic maximum gage height at the mouth of Pompton liiver, 
and there is nothing to indicate that it was caused, as has been claimed, 
))v slack water from the Pompton flood l)eing forced back into Great 
Piece Meadows. There is no doubt that a part of the Pompton flood 
was so diverted, but there was maintained throughout at Little Falls 
a steady pressure, which constantly increased to maximum. This flood 
check at Dundee dam was observed in 1902, but it could not be shown 
to arise from the f re({uently mentioned phenomena at the mouth of 
Pompton River. It is important to prove or disprove this hypothesis. 
IRR 92—04 2 



18 



THE PASSAIC FLOOD OF 1903. 



[NO. 92. 



If it were found to be true, it could be advantageously taken into con- 
sideration in connection Avith measures for the prevention of flood 
damages. As tlie Pompton had no such effect upon the flood flow at 
Dundee dam in two consecutive historic floods, the writer is inclined 
to believe that the idea is entirely erroneous. 

Since the flow curves in fig. 1 were drawn it has been found ])y care- 
ful observation that the depressions which occur in the rise of ever}'^ 
flood over Dundee dam are prol)ably due to the carrying away of the 
flashboards which are placed upon the dam crest in times of low water. 
A review of the gage heights recorded by floods for several years past 
shows that the break occurs when the height of water over the dam 
crest reaches from -iO to 60 inches. The flashboards used upon this 

Sec. -feet. 



40, 000 
35, 000 
30, 000 
































Floo 

Floo 


i of 1902 
i of 1903 
































:J 




y.. 














1.5,000 

10, UOll 






^ 


1 






^ 




















\ 








; 


/ 














::--- 


-^ 




/ 


^ 


5,000 

(1 




/ 





















Hours: 30 60 iio 120 150 180 210 240 270 

Fig. 1.— Comparative flood run-olT at Dundee dam, March, 1902, and October, 1903. 



oOO 



dam are usually 18 inches wide, and as they are supported ))y iron rods, 
which are of approximately the same strength and arc placed upon the 
dam ])y one crew of workmen, it may be safely assumed that they are 
of approximately equal stability and might be expected to fail almost 
sinudtaneously along the length of the dam crest. So sudden a decrease 
in the eifectuiil lieight of the dam must lower the water on the dam 
crest markedly, and as every other probable cause has l)een eliminated 
in the case of the recent flood, the explanation of the check in the 
l)rogi'ess of floods ov(M- this dam may ))e safely accepted as due to 
carrying away of Ihishboards. This efl'ect should be apparent in the 
gage-height records only. 



I,EIG}ITON.] 



DESCENT OF FLOOD. 



19 



In the flow diagninis (tii;"s. 1 and 2) the eff'ect would not be the same, 
but the curve wotdd rUa more sharply. Similar!}^, the measurements 
at the be^'inninj( are not correct, as the}^ are calcuhited according to 
gage heights measured from the stone crest of the dam. Therefore, a 
true flood curve at this point would ho much flsitter at the beginning 
and rise sharply at a period coincident with the carrying away of the 
flashboards. 

An important difference between the two floods is that the earlier 
contiimed longer, but the later one was much higher. The flood of 
1902 was caused b}^ the turning of an equivalent of approximately 6 
inches of precipitation into the main channel during a period of six 
days. In the deluge of 1903 there fell 11.74 inches of rain, the greater 
part of which was precipitated in 36 hours. Thus it is seen that there 
was in the flood of 1903 a larger rainfall during a nuich shorter period 
than in the flood of 1902. Computation shows that the total run-off 
from the drainage area above Dundee dam during the earlier flood 
was 13,379,000,000 cubic feet, and that on account of the frozen con- 
dition of the ground at that time this amount of water represented 
practically all of the precipitation. During the flood of 1903 there 
was a total run-ofl' for the same area of 1-1,772,000,000 cubic feet, 
which represents about QH per cent of the observed precipitation. 
According to these figures the total amount of run-off in the 1903 
flood was only 10 per cent greater than that in 1902, while the actual 
flood height during the 1903^ flood was 27 per cent higher than during 
the flood of 1902. The above comparison shows, in a striking manner, 
the effect of the condition of the surf^ace. In the case of the later 
flood we had, as has ])een stated in previous pages, an area which had 
been well watered during the previous summer, and the observed 
ground-water levels were fairly high. There was, however, sufficient 
storage capacity in the basin to retain about 34 per cent of the pre- 
cipitation occurring between October 7 and 11. This water must have 
been largely absorbed by the earth. The general relations of the 
floods of 1903 and 1902 can therefore be briefly stated as follows: 

General relations of floods of 1903 and VJ02. 



1902. 
1903. 



Average 
precipita- 
tion. 



Inches. 
6 
11.74 



Duration of 

pret'ipita- 

tion. 



Days. 



Maximum 
flood flow. 



Sec-feet. 
24, 800 
35, 700 



Total run-off. 



Cubic/eel. 
13, 379, 000, 000 
14, 772, 000, 000 



Per cent. 
«100 
66 



Duration of 
flood at Dun- 
dee dam. 



Hours. 



270 
225 



1 Approximately. 

In the following table and fig. 2 are recorded gage heights taken 
at hourly intervals during the crucial part of the flood and the amount 
of water expressed in cubic feet per second flowing over the crest of 
the dam at each gage height. 



20 



THE PASSAIC FLOOD OF 1903. 



[Nu. 92. 



en o 



hj ri w CO o 

o c;* O c;' o 



§Q C 

8 8 

Oct. 8, 6 a. m. 
12 m. 

12 p.m. 
Oct. 9, 12 m. 

12 p. m. 
Oct. 10,12 m. 

12 p. m. 
Oct. 11, 12 m. 

12 p. m. 
Oct. 12, 12 m. 

12 p. m. 
Oct. 13, 12 m. 

12 p. m. 
Oct. 14, 12 m. 

12 p. m. 
Oct. 15,12 m. 

12 p. m. 
Oct. IG, 12 m. 

12 x>. m. 
Oct. 17,12 m. 

12 p. m. 
Oct. 18, 12 m. 

12 p.m. 

FKi. 2.— DiHKram of llooil How at DiiiKkc dam, Hood of VM'S. 



\ 
















\ 




















K 




















? 
















\ 


\ 


N. 
















\ 


) 














/ 
















/ 














A 














/ 


/ 














/ 




























1 
































1 
















1 














1 
















/ 
















/ 
















































/ 














i 


i 















LEIGHTON.] 



DESCENT OF FLOOD. 

Flnin of Pdsanir River (it Dundee dam, 190S. 



21 



Date and hour. 



Got. 8. 6.80 a. lu 

I p. m 

r>.80 p. m 

8 p. in 

10 p. Ill 

II p. Ill 

IL' p. Ill 

9. 1 a. Ill 

2.30 a. in 

4 a. in 

() a. in 

8.80 a. m 

9.40 a. m 

10.55 a. m 

12 m 

1 ]). in 

2 p. Ill 

8 p. in 

3.45 p. m 

4.25 p. in 

5 p. Ill :... 

5.45 p. Ill 

0.80 p. ni 

7 j>. lu 

8 p. m 

9 p. m 

10 p. m 

11 !>. Ill 

12 p. in 

10. 1 a. Ill 

2 a. Ill 

8 a. Ill 

4 a. in 

5 a. Ill 

a. Ill 

7 a. in 

8 a. Ill 

9 a. ni 

10 a. in 

11 a. ni 

11.35 a. m 



Gage. 



Feet. 

0.66 

1.50 

2.17 

2.59 

3.00 

3. 33 

3. 50 

8.50 

8.59 

3. 50 

3.66 

3.75 

4.00 

4.66 

4.75 

5.25 

5. 37 

5.45 

5.37 

5.29 

5.23 

5.19 

5.17 

5.11 

5. 13 

5.17 

5.21 

5.27 

5.4 

5. 5 

5.66 

5.73 

5.91 

6.00 

6.2 

6.33 

6.4 

6.6 

6.83 

6.89 

6.97 



Flow. 


Sec-feet. 


780 


3, 175 


5 


500 


7 


300 


9 


125 


10 


700 


11 


525 


11 


550 


11 


950 


11 


525 


12 


300 


12 


775 


14 


075 


17 


650 


18 


200 


21 


050 


21 


750 


22 


250 


21 


750 


21 


300 


20 


950 


20 


700 


20 


600 


20 


250 


20 


350 


20 


600 


20 


750 


21 


150 


21 


950 


22 


500 


23 


500 


23 


900 


25 


050 


25 


650 


26 


900 


27 


700 


28 


150 


29 


400 


30 


750 


81 


250 


31 


750 



Date and hour. 



Oct. 10. 12 m .... 

1 p. m 

2 p. m . . 

3 ]). Ill . . 

4 p. m . . 

5 p. m . . 

6 p. m . . 

7 J), m . - 

8 p. m . . 

9 }). m . . 

10 p. m . 

11 p. m . 

12 11. m . 

11. 1 p. m . . 

2 a. m . . . 

3 a. m . . . 

4 a. m . . . 

5 a. m 

6 a. m 

7 a. m . . . 

8 a. m . . . 

9 a. in . . . 

10 a. m.. 

11 a. ni. . 
12m.... 

1 p. m . . 

2 p. m . . 

3 p. m . . 

4 p. m . . 

5 p. m . . 

6 J), m . . 

7 p. m . . 

8 p. m . . 

9 p. in . . 

10 ]). m . 

11 p. m . 

12 p. m . 

12. 1 a. m . . 

2 a. m . . . 

3 a. Ill 

4a. in... 



Gage. 



Flow. 



Feet. 


Sec. -feet. 


6.93 


31,450 


6.95 


31 


650 


7.13 


82 


800 


7.19 


38 


150 


7.25 


83 


500 


7.39 


34 


450 


7.39 


84 


450 


7.40 


34 


500 


7.54 


35 


350 


7.62 


35 


800 


7.60 


35 


700 


7.57 


35 


500 


7.43 


84 


650 


7.47 


34 


950 


7.5 


85 


100 


7.42 


34 


700 


7.3 


34 


450 


7.3 


34 


150 


7.3 


84 


150 


7.37 


34 


300 


7.33 


34 


100 


7.31 


83 


900 


7.23 


33 


450 


7.25 


82 


525 


7.18 


88 


100 


7.18 


33 


100 


7.17 


88 


300 


7.08 


32 


450 


7.00 


31 


950 


6.96 


31 


700 


6.89 


81 


250 


6.86 


31 


050 


6.83 


30 


850 


6.79 


30 


600 


6.81 


30 


700 


6.73 


30 


200 


6.71 


30 


100 


6.63 


29 


600 


6.59 


29 


350 


6.55 


29 


100 


6.51 


28 


800 



22 



THE PASSAIC FLOOD OF 1903. 
Florr of Passaic River at Dundee dam, 1903 — Continue<l. 



[no. n. 



Date and hour. 



Oct. 12. 5 a. m 

6 a. m 

7 a. m 

8 a. m 

9 a. Ill 

10 a. m 

11 a. Ill 

12 m 

1 p. m 

2 p. m 

3 p. Ill 

4 p. Ill 

5 p. m 

6 p. m 

7 p. m 

8 p. m 

9 p. m 

10 p. m 

11 p. m 

12 p. m 

13. 1 a. m 

2 a. m 

3 a. m 

4 a. in 

5 a. m 

6 a. m 

7 a. m 

8 a. m 

9 a. Ill 

10 a. m 

11 a. Ill 

12 111 

1 ] ). Ill 

2 p. Ill 

3 p. Ill 

4 p. in 

5 1 ). Ill 

fi p. Ill 

7 p. Ill 

8 p. Ill 



Gage. 



Feet. 
6.42 
6.42 
6.39 
6.39 
6.25 
6.21 
6.17 
6.05 
6.06 
5. 93 
5.89 
5.87 
5.79 
5.77 
5.75 
5.73 
5.63 
5. 59 
5. 54 
5.49 
5.44 
5.39 
5. 35 
5.30 
5.24 
5.21 
5.16 
5. 13 
5. 08 
5.04 
5. 00 
4.94 
4.89 
4. 85 
4.84 
4.75 
4.71 
4.66 
4.64 
4.59 



Flow. 



Sec-feet. 
28, 250 
28, 250 
28, 100 
28, 100 
27, 200 
26, 950 
26, 700 
26, 100 
26, 050 
25, 200 
24, 950 
24, 800 
24, 300 
24, 150 
24, 250 
23, 950 
23, 300 
23, 100 
22, 750 
22, 450 
22, 200 
21, 000 
21,650 
21,350 
21,000 
20, 850 
20, 525 
20, 350 
20, 100 
19,800 
19,560 
19,200 
18,900 
18,700 
18,650 
18, 200 
17,900 
17, 650 
17,550 
17,250 



Date and hour. 



Oct. 13. 9 p.m.. 
10 p.m. 



Gage. 



Flow. 



Feel. 
4.54 
4.51 

11 p. Ill I 4.49 

4. 37 
4.37 
4.35 
4. 35 
4. 33 

5 a. m I 4.34 



12 p. 111... 
14. 1 a. Ill 

2 a. m 

3 a. m 

4 a. m 



6 a. m 

7 a. Ill 

8 a. Ill 

9 a. m 

10 a.m.... 

11 a. Ill 

12 111 

1 p. m 

2 p. m 

3 ]). Ill 

4 p. m 

5 p. m 

6 J), m 

7 p. m 

9 p. m 

12 p. Ill .... 

15. 6.30 a. m . . 

1 p. m 

6.30 p. Ill . . 

16. 6.:}0 a. Ill . . 

1 p. Ill 

6.30 p. Ill . . 

17. 6.30 a. Ill .. 

1 p. m 

6.30 p. Ill .. 

18. 6.30 a. Ill .. 

1 ]i. Ill 

6.30 ]!. Ill . 

19. 6.30 a. Ill . 

1 p. m 

6..30 ]). m . 



4.31 
4.27 
4.25 
4.17 
4.08 
4.05 
4.02 
4.02 
4.01 
3.97 
3.94 
3. 85 
3. 75 
3. 75 
3.71 
3.-66 
3.50 
3.41 
3.41 
3. 00 
3.00 
2.91 
2. 5 



2.41 
2. 33 



Sec. -feet. 
17. 000 



16, 

16, 

16, 

16, 

15, 

15, 

15, 

15, 

15, 

15, 

15, 

14, 

14, 

14, 

14, 

14, 

14, 

13, 

13, 

1.3, 

12, 

12, 

12, 

12, 

11, 

11, 

11, 

9, 

9, 

8, 

6, 

fi, 

fi, 

fi, 

^^, 

6, 

4, 

4, 

4. 



750 
700 
000 
000 
925 
925 
800 
850 
700 
500 
300 
900 
500 
325 
150 
150 
100 
900 
750 
300 
775 
775 
550 
300 
525 
050 
050 
125 
125 
700 
900 
900 
900 
900 
500 
200 
900 
900 
900 



LEiGHTON.] THE PASSAIC FLOOD OF 1903 23 

DAMAGES. 

GENERAL STATEMENTS. 

Estimates of flood damtiges arc alwa3^s approximations onl3\ It is 
possil)le to determine with a fair degree of assurance the cost of 
replacing structures which have been carried away, to estimate the 
value of goods destro^^ed — especially if they be commodities stored in 
shops or warehouses — to calculate the amount of operatives' wages lost, 
and in the case of general mercantile business to estimate the dam- 
ages incurred through consequent reduction of trade. Destruction 
by flood, however vast, is incomplete. It difl'ers materially from 
destruction b}- fire, for often destructible property is of value 
after floods have passed. Buildings which are inundated still retain 
value, and many kinds of merchandise are not totallj^ destroj^ed. 
Therefore when the amount of damages is calculated there is always 
to be taken into consideration the fact that a part of the material which 
has been flooded can })e reclaimed, and retains some proportion, at 
least, of the value which it had previously possessed. Furthermore, 
damages by flood enter into practical]}'" every detail of social and bus- 
iness att'airs. There are losses which are severe to one or more per- 
sons, and which can not be appreciated except by those whom the 
floods have actually overtaken. Therefore estimations of flood dam- 
ages can be onl}" approximate, and while a measure of accuracy may 
be reached with respect to a part of the losses, there remains a neces- 
sity for approximation which can not be classed with carefully com- 
puted damages along other lines. 

HIGHLAND TRIBUTARIES. 

Along the three northern tributaries, the Ramapo, Wanaque, and 
Pequanac, and at their confluence with the Pompton, the destruction 
by flood waters was far greater than along the Kockaway, Whippany, 
and upper Passaic, or in that area described as the Central Basin. In 
the drainage areas of the three tributaries last mentioned the waters 
were higher than in the flood of 1902, but the general ettects were of 
the same nature, and consisted principally of flooded lands, houses, 
and washouts. There were few radical cases of complete destruction 
like those which marked the course of the flood in the northern tribu- 
taries. The principal interest is therefore confined to the Pompton. 
and the three highland tril)utaries which discharge into it. 

Ramapo River. — The greatest destruction was along the Ramapo. 
It is the largest of the upland branches, and was therefore the heaviest 
contributor to the main stream. Throughout the flood period the 
stream was especiall}' violent, causing great apprehension in the lower 
vallev. 



24 THE PASSAIC FLOOD OF 1003. [no. 92. 

The destruction along several stretches of the valley was almost 
complete. Nearlj^ all the dams failed, and every l)ridoo across the 
river, with one exception, was carried away. Some small villages 
were swept bare, and the damages to realty value and personal prop- 
erty were excessive. 

It was only by strenuous measures that the dam im|)ounding the 
waters of Tuxedo Lake was saved. If this had failed the destruction 
along the entire course of the river, even to the cities in the lower 
valley, would have been enormously increased. 

The dam at Cranberry Pond, in Arden, failed in the early part of 
the storm, the flood waters disabling the Tuxedo electric-light plant 
and inundating the Italian settlements along the river below. The 
failure of the dam conserving the waters of Nigger Pond, which lies 
at the head of a small tributary emptying into the Kamapo below 
Tuxedo, resulted in the inundation of Ramapo village. The village of 
Sloatsburg was practically obliterated. 

The damage at Pompton Lakes was especialh' severe. During the 
early part of the flood the timber dam of the Ludlum Steel and Iron 
Company, which raised the water to a height of 27 feet, and afforded 
7.04 horsepower per foot fall, was carried away with a part of the 
headrace. (See PI. II, A.) This sudden emptying of Pompton Lake, 
an expanse of 196 acres (see PI. II, 7i), was extremely destructive to 
Pompton Plains, and the destruction of the dams above on Ramapo 
River, which followed some time after the bursting of the lower dam, 
refilled Pompton Lake above its former level, and caused greater dam- 
age than that which resulted from the failure of Pompton dam itself. 
The large iron bridge just below the dam was carried away, with the 
stores of the Ludlum Steel and Iron Company, The river front along 
this company's property was destroj'ed, along with coal docks at the head 
of Morris Canal feeder. The channel of the river below the dam is tilled 
with debris, which will raise the height of the water in the tailrace, and 
unless it is cleared will diminish the availa])le power at the iron works. 
It has been authoritatively announced, however, that the power facil- 
ities will not be restored, as the Ludlum Steel and Iron Company is 
preparing to use steam power exclusively. 

Peqiumac and AVanaque rivers. — Along Pequanac River the prin- 
cipal damage consisted of washed-out roads and destroyed bridges. 
The large ponded area in this basin was practically full at the time of 
the Hood, and, as measurements at Macopin dam show, the run-off per 
square mile was extremely large. In the Wanaque drainage area the 
storage facilities afforded at (Jreenwood Lake were probal)ly useful in 
holding })ack a part of the water For a ])rief period, l)ut the damages 
along the stream are comparable to those of the Pequanac. 

The effect of the flow from th<\se two streams, added to that of the 
Ramapo, was particularly disastrous over the I'ompton Plains. Three 



U. S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY 



WATER-SUPPLY PAPER NO. 92 PL. II 




.4. POMPTON LAKES DAM AND WATER FRONT OF LUDLUM STEEL AND IRON 

COMPANY. 




B. DRY BED OF POMPTON LAKE. 



LEiGHTON.] DAMAaES. 25 

bridj^es at Pompton station, over Wanaque and Pcquanac rivers, were 
carried awa3% and in the end one bridg-e onl}^ remained over I'ompton 
Kiver, that at Pequanac station. In all about loO houses were inun- 
dated on Pompton Plains, and the damage to roads and culverts was 
particularly severe. 

The total loss in the drainage area of Pompton River was $;350,uo(). 

CENTRAL BASIN. 

Over the Central Basin there was the usual impounding of flood 
waters, but the ett'ects were not materially different from those 
descrilied in the report on the flood of 1902. The damage along this 
basin from floods of this character is accumulative by reason of the 
fact that the presence of water over the land for so long a period 
kills the desirable feed grasses and fosters in their place the coarse 
meadow g-rass. This effect has been observed for some years, par- 
ticularly since the flood of 1896. It is estimated that over the Central 
Basin the damage to crops and arable land alone arising from the 
floods of 1902 and 1903 amounts to $300,000. A statement of the 
damage arising from the later flood can not separately ])e made, 
as its effect upon the fertility of the meadow lands can not be 
determined without the experience of a planting season. 

LOWER VALLEY. 

The flow of the stream through the constricted channel at Little 
Falls and on to Great Falls at Paterson is given in the weir measure- 
ments on page IT. It was attended b}^ comparatively large dam- 
ages, the features of which were not materially different from those 
described in the previous report. The pumping station of the East 
Jersey Water Company, situated just below Little Falls dam, did not 
suffer as severely as during the previous flood, by reason of the fact 
that extensive and effective barricades were placed so as to keep a 
large part of the water away from the pumps. This was not accom- 
plished in the flood of 1902. The total damage in this district 
amounted to nearly $200,000. 

The channel contours were changed somewhat in this portion of the 
stream. In the river at the pumping station of the East Jersey Water 
Company there was completed a somewhat interesting cycle of changes, 
described in the following extract of a letter from Mr. G. Waldo 
Smith, chief engineer for the New York aqueduct connnissioners, 
and formerly engineer and superintendent of the East Jersey W^ater 
Company : 

"No better illustration of the old adage, 'The river claims its own,' 
could be given than that offered by the action of Passaic River at 
Little Falls, New Jersey, at the point where the works of the 
East Jersey Water Company have been constructed. These works 



26 THE PASSAIC FLOOD OF 1903. [no. 92. 

were built between 1897 and 1900. In the course of the work the 
river oluuinol for a distance of several thousand feet down stream from 
the power house was drained and improved, so that the head on the 
wheels at the ordinar}^ stage of the river was increased about 6 feet. 
From the time this improvement was completed to March, 1902, 
throug-h the action of the ordinary flow of water and moderate floods, 
this head had been reduced about one-third. The great freshet of 
March, 1902, cut off' about another third, and the recent flood has 
completed the cycle and entirel}" wiped out the benetit due to the river 
improvement, and the water at the pumping station stands now at 
almost precisely the same level that it stood before any improvements 
were undertaken. New bars were formed in approximately the same 
location as they existed before, and, so far as possible, except for the 
changed conditions ])rought about b}' the ])uilding of the power station, 
the condition of the river is not dissimilar to that existing when the 
work was commenced. 

""In this connection it might be well to state that a New Jersey 
drainage commission, in blasting out a channel below the Little Falls 
dam some years ago, dumped a considerable portion of the excavation 
in the deep water under the Morris Canal viaduct. 

"The action of the two great floods, March, 1902, and October, 
1903, has washed a large part of this material out of this deep hole 
and piled it up in the river about 300 feet below where the river 
widens, and reduces the force of the current. 

" I have made no estimate of the amount of material deposited in 
the river, but oflliand should say that it would be at least 100,000 
yards." 

Paterson. — The flood district in the city of Paterson (see PI. Ill) 
comprised 196 acres and involved the temporary obstruction of 10.3 
miles of streets. Along the streets close to the river banks the height 
of water was 12 feet, sufiicient to inundate the first floors of all the 
l)uildings (see PI. I, 7i), and in some cases to reach to the second floor. 
During this flood period householders who remained at their homes 
were compelled to use boats, while in the more exposed places the 
danger was too great to admit of remaining, and at one time 1,200 per- 
sons were housed and fed in the National Guard armory at Paterson. 

The bridges crossing Passaic River in Passaic, Essex, and Bergen 
counties were almost completely destroyed, and the damage amounted 
to $f).54,Sll. Within tiie limits of Paterson, below Great Falls, all of 
the highway bridges except two were either severely damaged or com- 
pletely carried away. West street bi-idgc, the first below the falls, was a 
Melan concrete, steel-arch structure, built in 1897, and costing $()5,000. 
It was composed of three spans, each about 90 feet long. The flood 
practically split two s])ans longitudinally, the upstream side of each, 
equal to about one-third of the width of the l)ridgc, being carried 



U. S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY 



WATER-'^UPPLY PAPER NO. 92 PL. )V 




A. WASHOUT AT SPRUCE STREET, PATERSON, N^ J. 




B RIVER STREET, PATERSON, N. J,, AFTER FLOOD. 



U. S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY 



WATER-SUPPLY PAPER NO. 92 PL. V 




A. EFFECTS OF FLOOD IN MILL DISTRICT, PATERSON, N. J. 




B. THE WRECK OF A HOTEL IN PATERSON, N. J. 



LEiGiiTON.] DAMAGES. 27 

away. This structure was built to conform to the established grades 
of streets on both sides of the river and was completely inundated, 
forming a barrier for iioating debris and practically making a dam in 
the river. Main street bridge is a 3-span, steel-arch structure, which 
was completely covered during the flood, but was only slightly injured. 
Arch street bridge, built in 1902 to take the place of a structure 
carried away by the March flood, was a concrete-arch })ridgc of three 
spans. It was undermined at the north pier and collapsed, being 
practically destroyed. The original cost of this bridge was $84:,000. 
Its piers presented a serious obstruction to the flow of the stream, 
especially as the channel is very narrpw at this point. In addition to 
this, the bridge was of low grade and admirably adapted for deterring 
flood flow. Below Arch street bridge all the other structures crossing 
the Passaic were of iron and were carried away, with the exception of 
Sixth avenue and Wesel bridges. Those destroyed were designated 
as follows: Straight street, Hillman street, Moffat, Wagaraw, Fifth 
avenue. East Thirty-third street, and Broadway bridges. All these 
structures were built too low, and were inundated during the early 
stages of the flood. 

The damage to real propert}^, stock, and household goods in the 
city of Paterson amounted, according to certifled returns, to about 
$2,700,000. It is impossible to secure correct figures, because mer- 
chants and manufacturers refuse to give details of losses, fearing that 
the publication thereof would affect their credit. General ideas con- 
cerning the destruction by the flood can be gathered from Pis. I, B^ 
III, IV, V, and VI. 

Passaic and viciiiity. — Below the city of Paterson destruction was 
as complete as in Paterson, although the damage was not as great 
])ecause the improvements were not as valuable. Damage to prop- 
erty, exclusive of public works, in this region, amounted to about 
$1,250,000. This estimate does not take into consideriition losses by 
manufacturers arising from destruction of raw materials or finished 
products. The flood was about 4i feet higher than that of 1902. (See 
PI. VII, A.) 

On the right ])ank of Passaic River, in the city of Passaic, the dam- 
age was severe, especially to manufacturing plants. In addition to 
the flood in the Passaic itself, the bursting of Morris Canal, a few 
miles east of Passaic, flooded Wesel Brook, which in Passaic is used 
as the tail-race of the Dundee Power Company. The capacit}' of 
Wesel Brook channel is limited, and the extraordinar}- amount of 
water which was turned into it carried away all culverts and bridges 
from Richfield to Passaic. 

Below Passaic, along the river front of Essex (bounty, the damages 
to bridges amounted to $50,000. (See PI. VII, B.) The loss due to 
washouts in roads throughout the county amounted to $15,000. The 



28 THE PASSAIC FLOOD OF 1903. [no. 92. 

effects of the flood were apparent alono- the entire leng-th of the river 
and into Newark Bay. The damage from inundation in Xewarlv and 
vicinity amounted to $758,191). 

The iigures above given with reference to damage along Passaic 
River are uncommonly accurate, being for the most part the result of 
a house-to-house canvass ])y the northern New Jersey flood commis- 
sion. As has been stated a])ove, tradesuien are reluctant to give full 
details with reference to their losses through fear of injured credit. 
Koughl}^ estimating the damage as a whole, and taking into considera- 
tion factors which were given to the writer confldentially, the damage 
throughout the drainage area from this flood will amount to not less 
than $7,00(),00(). 

PREVENTIVE MEASURES. 

GENERAL DISCUSSION. 

In the consideration of means of preventing damages by floods ever}" 
plan proposed falls under one of two general heads — the storage of 
flood waters or an increase in the capacit}' of the streams. 

The first plan involves the construction at selected localities of res- 
ervoirs of sufficient size to hold all or a greater part of the waters 
which run over the surface during and after storms. This plan is not 
practicable except where valleys or plains are inclosed l)y high ridges 
and these ridges approach sufiiciently near each other to admit of the 
economical construction of a bank or dam across the gorge or bed of 
the stream which flows through, so that the inclosure will be complete 
and form a water-tight ])asin. Where such a reservoir exists the 
water can be held back and gradually let down through properl}' pro- 
vided gates so that the channel will not be flooded. 

For flood purposes alone it would lie necessary to provide reservoirs 
of sutiicient capacity" to contain the run-ofl' waters resulting from the 
largest storms. With such provisions it would be necessary to entirely 
empty the reservoir as soon as possil)le after a storm had passed 
and leave its full capacity available for the next storm. It is there- 
fore better, wherever possible, to provide a reservoir capacity con- 
siderably larger than that represented by the run-off from the heaviest 
storms, so that water ma}" be stored for use as power or domestic 
supply. With such provision it is necessary merely to draw from the 
reservoir water to a depth equivalent to the stream run-off in the 
drainage area above. 

The second plan for prevention of flood damages involves provisions 
for letting the flood wat(M' out rapidly ))y riMUoving ol)st ructions to its 
flow by straightening and deepening the channels and providing long 
eml)ankments, dikes, or levees which rise above the ordinary river 
level to a height exceeding that of tlie stream during its highest floods. 
This plan is most generall}' followed in the case of Uirge rivers like 



U. S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY 



WATER-SUPPLY PAPER NO. 92 PL. VI 




A DEVASTATION IN HEBREW QUARTER, PATERSON, N. J. 




B. A COMMON EXAMPLE OF FLOOD DAMAGE. 



U. S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY 



WATER-SUPPLY PAPER NO. 92 PL. VII 




.1. INUNDATED LANDS AT PASSAIC, N. J. 



,~<?^. 



> 




■ I 



n 




B. UNDAMAGED BRIDGE ACROSS PASSAIC RIVER AFTER PARTIAL SUBSIDENCE 

OF FLOOD. 



LEiGHTON.] PREVENTIVE MEASURES. 29 

the Mississippi, where the contributing' area is enormous and the con- 
servation of the waters would be impracticable even if tlie nature of 
the country would admit of the construction of reservoirs. In Switz- 
erland, where the torrents occasioned b}' the rapidly- melting snows 
are especially destructive, the flood waters are contincd by a series of 
parallel dikes on each side of the river, which have the effect of divid- 
ing the flow into several parallel streams. As the main river channel 
fllls and overflows the inner dikes, the overflow water collects into the 
flrst scries of parallel channels, and when a height is reached at which 
the second dikes are overflowed the water collects into the third, and 
so on. This gives an enormous carrying capacity, the limit of which 
is approached slowly, and therefore abundant opportunity is afl'orded 
for preparation upon the part of the riparian owner. 

The drainage basin of Passaic River is admirably adapted to the 
development of the conservation S3'stem. At its headwaters in the 
mountains of northern New Jersey are numerous sites for reservoirs. 
The comparatively limited area draining into Passaic River makes 
such a scheme relatively inexpensive. On the other hand there is 
abundant opportunity for efl'ective work in removing obstructions 
and straightening and deepening the channel of the lower river. So 
that, all things considered, the prevention of flood damages in the 
Passaic Basin can be l^est accomplished by a combination of the two 
general methods above outlined. 

LOWER VALLEY IMPROVEMENTS. 

The channel of Passaic River ))elow Great Falls, at Paterson, is of 
limited ca|mcit3^ To anj^one making an inspection, especially within 
the cit}^ of Paterson, it is readily apparent that the river bed has for 
years been considered a legitimate field for encroachment. Owners 
of lands fronting on the river have increased their holdings by filling 
in beyond the channel line. Buildings have been erected upon these 
tracts and the ])ailders have not hesitated to extend retaining walls 
still farther into the river bed. Refuse from the city's streets, light 
and unsta])le in character, has ])een freely deposited upon the baidv to 
be carried out into the river. Thus the channel has been constricted 
laterally, the bottom raised, and there is left for the flood waters no 
alternative than that of extending themselves in the upward direction. 
It would seem that this, at least, should have been unobstructed. 
Such, however, is not the case. 

The bridges across the Passaic have apparently been erected without 
reference to channel capacity. The authorities have evidently con- 
sidered it more important to retain established approach levels than 
to provide proper capacity for river water. As an example the fol- 
lowing instance may be cited: During the flood of 1902 a steel truss 
bridge across the river in Paterson was carried away. The point of 



30 THE PASSAIC FLOOD OF ]903. [no. 92. 

crossing was one of the narrowest places in the stream and it should 
have been clear to everyone that the space beneath the bridge was not 
large enough to carr}' flood waters. It should have l)een apparent 
that a new l)ridge, if erected at that point, nuist ])e high(>r than the 
old one, to be thoroughly safe. Notwithstanding, the new bridge was 
erected at the level of the old one, and in addition to this, it was a 
concrete arch structure, and the great piers and low arch springs 
reduced the former channel capacit}^ about 15 per cent. This new 
bridge, as might be expected, collapsed during the October flood. 

Along the entire course of the stream in the lower valley we And a 
continuation of instances of unreasonable encroachment and ill- 
considered bridge engineering, and there is opportunity for relieving 
a large part of the purely local obstructions by straightening the 
channel at chosen points. 

Although this matter has not been thoroughly investigated it is 
readily apparent to one traversing the river ))ank that considerable 
relief may be secured in this manner. Damage, however, can not ])e 
prevented hy this means alone. It would, of course, be possil)le to 
erect high and resistant levees along the entire course of the river, but 
this would be extremely expensive and would destroy the water front 
for connnercial purposes. In fact, such a plan is quite visionar^^ At 
the present time there are no obstructions in lower Pas.saic liiver the 
removal of which would give relief in the event of floods like those of 
1902 and 1903. When one considers the amount of water which was 
carried into the lower valley, the heights which it reached, and the area 
which it inundated, the futility of any local improvement except levee 
construction is emphasized. The present channel of the river will 
not carry without damage the amount of water recently thrown into it, 
and while it is important to provide regulations which will in the future 
prevent encroachment, and which will correct the evils now present 
along the channel, these measures can not, operating of themselves, 
give relief from flood devastation, Innnunity from flood destruction 
in the Passaic nnist come, if it ever comes, from the construction of 
flood-catchment reservoirs in the uphmds. 

It is not necessary to spend any great amount of time in determining 
the cause of floods ui)on the Passaic. A review of the flood history 
of this river shows that in ever}'^ case floods arise from extraordii:ary 
precipitation. High waters occur through the melting of snows and 
during periods of a])undant rain. The heavy Hoods which have been 
regarded as exti'aoi'dinary are clearly the result of unusual conditions 
of precipitation. The ri\er carries the usual flood waters, and no 
damage is done until the water i)oured into it is far beyond its carr}'- 
ing capacity. Therefore the provisions which are made for i)revent- 
ing damage b}- floods nuist, if they be effective, l)e designed to meet 
extraordinar\' conditions, and nieans which would prove eflectual in 



LEiGiiTON] PREVENTIVE MEASURES. 81 

ordinary cases will not stand the test. In order to appreciate the 
extent of the Hood in the lower vallc}' it is necessary to visit the flooded 
area and observe the points of flood height. Unless one does this 
he will be ver}' readily deceived when he considers means of flood 
prevention. 

FLOOD CATCHMENT. 

Among the highland tributaries of Passaic River there are three 
principal areas where storage reservoirs for flood catchment may be 
placed: (1) The Ramapo, Wanaque, and Pequanac drainage basins, 
from which the w^aters are carried into the centi'al ])asin by l\)mpton 
River; (2) the Rockaway drainage basin, and (3) the upper Passaic 
drainage basin. The remaining principal tributary of Passaic River, 
the Whippan}^, is not well provided with storage reservoir sites. The 
combined capacity of catchment reservoirs which coiUd ])e constructed 
in these drainage areas is considerably more than the volume of the 
heaviest known rainfall, that of October 8-11, 1903. 

In the description of reservoir possibilities in the following pages 
the data with reference to many of the basins are computed from 
planimeter and other measurements, the United States Geological Sur- 
vey topographic maps being used as a base. The measurements arc 
therefore not of reflned accuracy but sufiice for the purpose in view — 
that of showing flood catchment possibilities. 

POMPTON RESERVOIR. 

There are in the Pompton system several sites on Ramapo, Wanaque, 
and Pe(iuanac rivers which, if utilized, would aflord sufficient storage 
for flood catchment purposes, but the entire flow of the river system 
may be conserved in what has been described as the Pompton reser- 
voir. This project was first presented by Mr. C. C. Vermeule in the 
3'ear 18S1, the details being described at some length in the Engi- 
neering News, of April 12 of that year, pages 160-171. In this arti- 
cle Mr. Vermeule presented the possibilities of Pompton reservoir for 
use as an additional water supply for the city of New York, at the 
time when the Quaker Bridge reservoir on the Croton watershed was 
being considered. A few pertinent quotations from this article may 
be of interest: 

This basin, subdivided ])y minor ridges wliich cross it, furnishes several admirable 
sites for large storage reservoirs, with catcinuents from 50 to 400 sijuare miles in area, 
lying above on the primitive rock of the Highlands. About 6 miles of the north- 
eastern end of the basin is cut off by Hook Mountain, a small ridge of trap which 
crosses it from east to west, iu(;losing a basin 21 square miles in area, known as 
Pompton Plains, having its outlet at INIountain View, 5 miles west of Paterson, at a 
pass in Hook Mountain, through which the Pompton River flows to join the Passaic, 
2 miles below. This pass is the gateway by which the Delaware, Lackawanna and 
Western Railroad, the New York and Greenwood Lake Railway, and the Morris 
Canal enter the plains. The basin is also crossed near its head, above Pompton, by 
the New York, Susquehanna and Western Railroad. 



32 TH?: PASSAIC FLOOD OF 1903. [no. 9J. 

Tin- Poniptou River has a drainage area al)ove Moiintuiii View of 420 f^qiiare inihtJ. 
It is formed near the head of the l)asin by the conflueiice of the reijuanac from the 
northwest, the Wanaque from the north, and the Ramapo from the northeast. * * * 

Tlie entire flow from this watershed may be stored by ])nildiiig n dam aeross the 
gap at Moimtain View and converting I'onipton Plains into a great lake covering an 
area of 21 square miles. The elevation of the river at the gap is 168 feet. The slopes 
in the basin being gentle up to an elevation of 220 feet and abrupt beyond it, it will 
be advisable to take this as the minimum or low-water level of our reservoir. It is 
generally estimated that 25 per cent of the volume of the mean annual rain on a 
given catchment is sufficient reservoir capacity to fully utilize the flood flows. "We 
have long series of observations of rainfall at three points, which may be taken to 
fairly represent the Passaic catchment. At Newark the mean annual rainfall is 40.2 
inches, at Paterson, 50 inches, and at Lake Ilopatcong, 42. The last being on the 
Highlands, like most of our watersheds, is perhaps the safest to use. Now, 25 per 
cent of 42.5 inches, 10.62 inches, which, on 420 square miles, give a volume of 
10,362,000,000 cubic feet, the necessary capacity of reservoir. 

By raising our reservoir to 240 feet when full we secure a capacity of 10,493,000,000 
cubic feet, or ample to utilize the heaviest floods of the watershed. This gives a 
beautiful sheet of water 21.1 square miles in area, with ])old, rocky shores, and a 
depth at dam of 72 feet. "We secure the above capacity by uncovering Init 22 i)er cent 
of the reservoir bottom; and, as we shall presently see, we shall rarely need more 
than half this storage, and probably not oftener than once in ten years will we expose 
over 10 per cent of the area. By building side dams to keep certain flats always 
flowed this may be reduced to 5 per cent; and this area will be pretty evenly dis- 
tributed around 36 miles of uninhabited shore line, leaving the reservoir open to no 
valid sanitary objections. On the contrary, by relieving the remainder of the Pas- 
saic Basin of the flood waters of the Pompton, which now flow large areas of flat land 
during wet seasons, the sanitary condition of the valley would be nmch improved. 

In constructing this reservoir Mr. Vermeule stated that the follow- 
ing work would be necessar}^: 

The removal of the Delaware, Lackawanna and "Western Railroad from the basin 
by changing the alignment for 6 miles. It may be done without increase of length 
or detriment to the alignment. 

Three and one-fourth miles of the Morris Canal must be rel^uilt. No engineering 
difficulties are involved. 

Of the New York and Greenwood Lake Railway, 9 miles would liave to be rebuilt. 

The New York, Susquehanna and Western Railroad would l)e slightly shifted or 
raised for 3:} miles. 

A dam 2,400 feet long and 80 feet in height, with tuunels, wasteweir, and accessory 
works w'ould be recpiired at INIountain View. The situation is such that an ample 
wasteweir may be built at a low-sidi' dam on the solid rock of Hook Mountain remote 
from the dam, and outlets may be had by tunneling the same ridge. Hence the dam 
may be a plain, heavy earthen embankment; built, of course, with every i)recaution 
but subject to less than the usual dangers of such works. However, a masonry dam 
might readily l)e substituted. 

There would be 14,000 acres of arable land, swamps, and rough mountain land 
flowed. 

The works are estimated to cost as follows: 

Railroad and canal diversions v'505, 000 

Dam and accessory works 1 , 1('2, 000 

Land damages 1, 400, 000 

T(jtal 3, 067, 000 



LEiGHTON-.] PREVENTIVE MEASURES. 33 

A recoiuputation of the drainage area above Mountain View, made 
b}' the northern New Jersey flood commission, shows that it is 380 
square miles in extent. It was decided by this commission that the 
construction of this reservoir would be the most approved method of 
preventing- disastrous floods in the lower valle}^ of the Passaic. By 
raising a dam to a height of 202 feet al)Ove tide, 8 inches of water on 
the drainage area above might be held back, which, it was believed, 
would be a sufficient maximum for flood catchment With this amount 
of storage the estimates of the flood conunission showed that the 
remainder of the drainage area would not turn a sufficient amount of 
water into the lower vallc}' channel to cause flood damages. 

It was also demonstrated by the flood commission that by increasing 
the height of the dam an opportunity w^ould be afl'orded for conserving 
water, and at the maximum height of 220 feet above tide sufficient 
storage capacity would l)e available to provide 5,000 horsepower at 
Little Falls, Great Falls, and Dundee dam throughout all dry seasons. 
The value of such a storage reservoir for municipal water-supply 
purposes is self-evident. 

The cost of Mountain View reservoir would be about $3,340,000. 
Developed for flood catchment with the spillwa}^ of the dam at 2()2 
feet above sea level the area of the reservoir would be 13.4 square 
miles, and the storage capacitv 7,200,000,000 cubic feet. 

RAMAPO SYSTEM. 

Along the Ramapo Valle}" there are alternative propositions, one of 
which involves the construction of a dam below Darlington and 
another across the head of Pompton Lake. 

In either case the water might be raised to the 300-foot contour, and 
if the dam across Pompton Lake were constructed a continuous lake 
would be formed extending lOi miles to Hillburn, N. Y. The improve- 
ment in either case would be positive, for as the country surrounding- 
is hill}- or mountainous it afl'ords excellent opportunity for the location 
of summer homes and parks, the lake being a potent factor in beauti- 
f.ving the situation and increasing the value of the surrounding region. 
There are, nevertheless, several things to be taken into consideration, 
the most important of which are the improvements which have been 
made I)}- wealthy residents along the valley where it has already been 
developed as a summer resort. 

By the construction of a dam at Darlington 1,100 feet long and TO 
feet high, the water would l)e raised to the 300-foot contour. The 
reservoir would have a water area of 2,001 acres, and the approximate 
storage capacity of 2,325,000,000 cubic feet. 

A dam across the head of Pompton Lake 2,850 feet long and 100 
feet high would raise the surface of the proposed lake to the 300-foot 
contour. This reservoir would have an area of 6.19 square miles and 

IRR 92—04 3 



34 THE PASSAIC FLOOD OF 19l«. [no. 92. 

a capacity of 6,300,000,000 cubic feet, equal to 17.;") inches run-off from 
the drainao-e area. Here the measure of safety is wide, sind if there 
were di-awn from the lake an amount of water equal to 12 inches on the 
drainage area there would still be 5.5 inches which could be used for 
compensati ng- purposes. 

The construction of either one of the a hove -described reservoirs 
w^ould involve interstate complications, as the 300-foot contour in 
Ramapo Valley includes a considerable part of the State of New York. 
This obstacle was deemed insurmounta])le by the northern New Jersey 
flood commission, and that commission directed studies to a reservoir 
which at the time of maximum flood would not back water into New 
York State to a greater height than it alread}" rises during such floods. 
The following description is taken from the report of the engineering 
committee of the flood commission: 

An admirable dam site is offered on Ramapo River about 2 miles above ( )akland 
village. The drainage area tributary to this point is about 140 square miles in 
extent, the country for the most part being quick-spilling and upland. By construct- 
ing there a dam 700 feet long and 65 feet high a reservoir w^th a water surface of 2.8 
square miles would be afforded, the flow-line elevation being 280 feet above tide. 
The capacity of such a reservoir would be 1,768,000,000 cubic feet, equal to about 
5.5 inches on the drainage area. 

WANAQUE SYSTEM. 

Near the headwaters of Wanaque River is Greenwood Lake, a large 
body of water described in Water-Suppl}^ Paper No. 88. Its value as a 
flood catchment basin is somewhat uncertain, as it is used as a storage 
feeder for Morris Canal. The surface level of this lake is controlled 
by gates, which naturally are operated b}' the canal authorities for the 
bcneflt of the canal. Therefore it is the ol)ject to store as great a 
volume of water as possible, and the w^ater falls below the dam crest 
at the outlet of the lake only when the dam opens in dry seasons and 
makes it necessary Under such conditions there is no certainty that 
storage capacity will be available during the time of a great storm, 
and in fact Greenwood Lake has been overflowing at the commence- 
ment of the storms which caused })oth of the recent floods. 

In view of the condition expressed above it will be necessary in 
providing for flood catchment in the Wanaque drainage area to omit 
entirely fi'om consideration the possi1)ility of assistance from Green- 
wood Lake. Below this point in the basin are several sites at which 
could l)e raised dams, which would effectuall}^ retain a large propor- 
tion at least of storm run-oft'. They may l)e descril)ed as follows: 

JItdvale reservoir. — By building a dam (50 feet high and 1,200 feet 
long across Wanaque River near Midvale, a resei-voir woidd be formed 
which would have a water surface of 2.1 square miles and a capacity of 
1.1!> 1,000, 000 cubic feet. The drainage area above this site is .S3 s(|uare 
miles, and the storage caimcity would therefore be equal to about 7.7 



LEIGHTUX. 



PKEVENTIVE MEASUKES. 35 



inches on the drainage area. The construction of this project would 
inv^olve the relocation of about i^ miles of the New York and Green- 
wood Lake Railroad; the damages apart from this would be nominal, 
the cost of the entire reservoir construction being- about $1,000,000. 

Ringwood reservoir. — Ringwood Creek runs through a gorge about 
1 mile above its confluence with the Wanaque. Above this is a well- 
detined basin. A dam about 70 feet high and 585 feet long would 
create a lake having an area of 52(> acres, the surface of which would 
be 380 feet above sea level. The drainage area tributar}^ to this point 
has an area of about 20 square miles, and as the proposed reservoir 
would have a capacitv of 915,800,000 cubic feet, there could be con- 
served a run-off of 20 inches. Allowing for a flood run-off' of 12 inches 
there would still ])e available for compensating pui'poses 8 inches on 
the basin, equal to 373,550,000 cubic feet. The construction of this 
reservoir w^ould involve the relocation of about 2 miles of the Ring- 
wood branch of the New York and Greenwood Lake Railroad, and 
the condemnation of comparatively valuable improvements in the 
proposed basin. 

^Yest Brook Teset^oir. — The drainage from 5.7 square miles might 
be conserved by the erection of a dam on West Brook, a tributary of 
Wanaque River, which enters it from the west. There is an avail- 
able site at which a dam 280 feet high might be erected. At this 
elevation the length along the top would be about 1,150 feet and 
about 2,330,000,000 cubic feet of water would be impounded. Little 
benefit would be derived from such a reservoir, as the limited drainage 
area affords a comparatively small proportion of flood run-ott' that 
might be well cared for at a lower point. For compensating purposes, 
however, a reservoir might be constructed here, the capacity of which 
could be adjusted to the actual demands. If the dam were raised to a 
height of about 280 feet from the base the storage afforded would l>e 
equal to 176 inches on the watershed, or about four average j^ears of 
precipitation, which is far beyond all probable storage necessities. 
The maximum available storage capacity is given in this case mereh' 
to show possibilities. 

PEQUANAC SYSTEM. 

There are few available reservoir sites of large size along the lower 
reaches of Pequanac River. Li the upper basin, however, there is a 
sutiicient available storage capacity to afford almost complete control 
of destructive floods from that part of the drainage area. Large tracts 
are alread}- reserved by the city of Newark for collection of municipal 
supply, and the storage capacit}^ developed is suflicient to serve the 
city throughout the driest seasons. The total capacity of Clinton, 
Oakridge, and Canistear reservoirs is about l,155,000,00<t cubic feet. 
These basins are not available for flood catchment, as the water is used 
for cit}' purposes and an endeavor is made to have in storage at all 



36 THE PASSAIC FLOOD OF 1903. [xo. 92. 

times the largest possible amount. The condition is exactl}^ simihir to 
that described in the case of Greenwood Lake. In considerino- the 
means for the construction of Hood-catchment reservoirs in Pequanac 
Basin there nuist he taken into account the conservation and delivery 
of the Newark supply. The adjustments with reference to the amount 
of water available at Macopin intake would have to be met. and if the 
s^'steni were interfered with compensation therefoi- would be taken 
into consideration. 

j^ewfoiiudland reservoir. — Pequanac River passes through a deep 
gorge between Copperas and Kanouse mountains, just below the vil- 
lage of Newfoundland. This point has been considered an excellent 
site for the construction of a dam, and in the installation of the present 
water-supply system of Newark it is proposed that the entire valle}' 
in which Newfoundland is situated be overflowed. The site is one of 
the most advantageous known for the creation of a tlood-catchment 
basin. If a dam 50 feet high were erected across this gorge, a lake 
would be formed which would have a surface area of 3.15 square miles 
and a capacity of 3.207. 2(»0, 000 cubic feet, equal to a storage of about 
30.5 inches on the 46.12 square miles of contributing drainage area. 
This would afford complete protection in case of a sudden run-off of 
12 inches, would provide for the supply of the city of Newark without 
greath' disturbing the present storage system of that city, and would 
still yield a large amount of water for compensating purposes in dry 
seasons. 

The construction of Newfoundland reservoir would be ver}' expen- 
sive, as it would involve the flooding of Newfoundhmd Village, in 
which there is considerable improved property. A})Out 3 miles of the 
track of the New York, Susquehanna and Western Railroad woukl be 
submerged, as well as a considerable mileage of macadamized high- 
wa3\s. On the whole, however, the Newfoundland resei'voir project 
is the most favorable which can be found on the PiMjuanac Basin. 
There are above this point numerous reservoir sites, but their c()nil)ined 
capacity would not be eipud to that of the proposed Newfoundland 
reservoir, and the construction would be probably cjuite as expensive. 

Sticl'h' pond rrstrrolr. — Below Newfoundland there are few avail- 
able places at which water could be stored. Stickle Pond is probal)lv 
the best adapted of any of those available. If a dam 1,050 feet long and 
80 feet high were erected across the river about 1 mile below the present 
outlet of Stickle Pond, a lake would be formed having a surface area of 
422 acres and a storage capacity of al)()ut 800,000,000 cubic feet. The 
drainage area al»o\e this dam would be approximately 4 sciuare miles. 
This is a con4)aratively small amount of storage, yet it would provide 
for all flood catchment in that comparatively limited area and would 
be of assistance at times in compensating the dry flow of the Pequanac. 



LEiGHTON] PREVENTIVE MEASURES. 37 

ROCKAWAY SYSTEM. 

Roclcaway River offers a greater number of available reservoir sites 
than either of the other highland tributaries of the Passaic. Some of 
the reservoirs which could bo constructed could be used solely as catch- 
ment areas to hold back flood waters, while the capacity of others 
would be so much greater than any single flood run-ofl' that they might 
serve also as compensating reservoirs. A large dam is now in process 
of erection at Old Boonton, conserving a considerable amount for the 
water for the municipal supph' of Jersey City. This reservoir can not 
be depended upon as a flood-catchment area, as it will be the aim of 
those in authority to maintain the water in it as high as possible. 

I\nccri'iUe vcScrvolr. — A short distance above Boonton the erection 
of a comparatively small dam would flood a large, irregular, flat basin 
having an area of a little more than 4i square miles and extending up 
the Rockaway Valley to Rockaway Village, up Beaver Brook to Beech 
Glen, and north and south for considerable distances. The probable 
capacity of this reservoir has been estimated, and it is fairly certain 
that it is considerabh' more than would be sufficient for ffood catch- 
ment. Its construction would, moreover, improve the entire valley 
and be of advantage to many interests. 

The northern New Jersey flood commission has selected for investi- 
gation a reservoir site on Rockaway River at Powerville. By the 
erection of a dam across the stream at this point, 28 feet in height and 
470 feet long, a reservoir 4.6 square miles in area, with a capacity of 
1,565.000,000 cubic feet, would be afl'orded. The drainage area above 
this point is 114 square miles. The cost of such a reservoir is esti- 
mated at ^600,000. 

North from Powerville, near the confines of the proposed Power- 
ville reservoir, there is an available reservoir site along Stony Brook. 
By the erection of a dam 1,100 feet long and 120 feet high a lake 
would be formed 645 acres in extent, which would servo as a flood- 
catchment basin and a compensating reservoir. This reservoir would 
hold appi'oximateh" 850,(>0(),000 cubic feet. The construction of a 
reservoir at this place offers no engineering difliculties, and the project 
may l)e regarded as extremely favorable. 

Dixons Pond, west of Rockaway Valley and northwest of Power- 
ville, is a small sheet of water which lies in a valley which might be 
flooded to a greater height. By the erection of a dam 450 feet long 
and /')0 feet high a lake of 136 acres would be created, which would 
form a part of the flood catchment and compensating service. 

LoiKjiiyjod Valley rese^'voir. — A large storage l)asin is afl'orded in 
Longwood Valley which, if developed to its full extent, would extend 
from a point about a mile below Lower Longwood 7- miles up the 
headwaters and reach to about 1^ miles above Peters] )urg. An 
alternative proposition is afl'orded which involves the submerging of 
less than half this area. 



38 THE PASSAIC FLOOD OF 1903. [no. 92. 

A dam 800 feet lono- and 55 feet high might be erected across a 
gorge about 1 mile south of Petersburg. There would be formed a 
lake of about 1.247 square miles, or 800 acres in extent. The hamlet 
of Petersburg would be submerged, but the damages from the destruc- 
tion of improved property would not be very great, as the improve- 
ments and the land are not especiall}" valuable. This reservoir would 
have a capacity of about 964,000,000 cubic feet and the surface would 
be at a height of 800 feet above sea level. 

The alternative plan, that of using a longer stretch of the valle}' for 
reservoir purposes, would involve the construction about 1 mile below 
Lower Longwood of a dam 1,300 feet long and 110 feet high. The 
reservoir thus formed would be 1,900 acres in extent and contain 
approximately 3,447,000,000 cubic feet. The drainage area above 
this dam is limited, and if the reservoir were drawn down to an amount 
equivalent to 15 inches upon the drainage area there would still remain 
an enormous amount of water which could be used in a compensatory 
wa}'^ to tide over dry seasons. 

Spl'drock Pond. — By erecting a dam 550 feet long and 30 feet high 
across a gorge at the outlet of Splitrock Pond, a lake could be formed 
having an area of 625 acres and adding to the present storage capacity 
of the lake an amount approximately equal to 475,000,000 cubic feet, 
equivalent to 38.75 inches on the drainage area. 

Thus it is seen that if this reservoir were drawn down an amount 
equivalent to 15 inches on the drainage area, which would without 
doubt give suiBcient protection from all floods, there would still remain 
a storage capacity of 23.75 inches for compensating purposes in addi- 
tion to the amount now available in Splitrock Pond. This project is 
one of the most attractive in the Kockaway Basin, as the damages 
which would l)e caused by flooding would be. comparatively speaking, 
nil. The property is, however, now owned by the East Jersey \\ ater 
Company, and is prized highly as a reservoir site by that corporation. 

IPPEK PASSAIC BASIX. 

MilUngton reservoir. — There is an area of swampland, comprising a 
part of the drainage area of upper Passaic Kiver al)ove Millington, 
which is known as (irreat Passaic Swamp. It is bounded on the south 
b}' a long, narrow trap ridge known as Long Hill, the summit of 
which rajiges from 400 to oOO feet in elevation, or roughly 200 foot 
above the ))order of this swamp. To the northwest the land rises grad- 
ually toward Trowbridge Mountains, while to the northeast is the 
t(»rminal moraine. The outlet of Passaic River at Millington is ]>v a 
naiTow gorge, which oilers natural facilities for the enaction of a dam. 

The whole situation is exceptionalh' good, and the surface of a 
reservoir might be fixed at anj' elevation between 240 and 30o feet 
above sea level. With the surface of the reservoir at 3oO feet a dam 
1,600 feet long and 90 feet high would he required. This lake would 



LEiGHTON.] PREVENTIVE MEASURES. 39 

have ail area of 2SA6 square miles. The drainage area above Milling- 
ton has, however, an area of only 53. .square miles, and the proposed 
reservoir would therefore cover more than half of this. Therefore the 
conservation of so large a quantity of water would not be necessar}^ nor 
advisable, unless the beautifying of the surrounding country were an 
object to be taken into consideration, which might be protitable. 

A better project, however, woidd be to construct a dam at Milling- 
ton 900 feet long and 50 feet higli, the crest being about 260 feet 
above sea level. There would be formed a lake with an area of 11). 41 
square miles, and a capacity of 1,477,600,000 cubic feet, equal to 9.864 
feet on the drainage area. This project is too great for the necessities 
here presented, and would not be wiselj' considered unless it were 
found advantageous to improve the country generally as a place of 
suburban residence. The land which would be flooded with the reser- 
voir crest at 260 feet is of a wet, swampy character, and its value for 
agricultural purposes is somewhat doubtful. Such construction would 
involve the flooding of 13 miles of road, which, however, would not 
involve a great loss of invested capital, as the roads generally are of a 
poor character. 

A second alternative would involve the construction of a dam across 
the Millingtoa gorge, 550 feet long and 30 feet high, raising the 
water to 240 feet above sea level and creating a lake of 14.40 square 
miles. This would conserve 4,026,000,000 cubic feet, equal to 2.69 
feet on the drainage area. This would be ample for flood purposes 
and would still aft'ord a large impounded area, as the drawing off of an 
amount equal to 10 or even 15 inches on the watershed would not 
reduce the size of the lake to any great extent. 

The whole project here presented involves few difficulties, and as 
the drainage area above is of small extent, the mere question of con- 
serving the flood waters coiild be met without great difliculty. The 
natural advantages, however, are so great and the land included 
within Great Passaic Swamp is of so little value that the surrounding 
country would be improved and beautified by the construction of such 
a reservoir. The opportunit}^ for vaiying the character of the reser- 
voir to meet the ideas of those interested seems unexampled, and as 
a whole it presents an extremely interesting field which may be 
profitably exploited. 

SADDLE RIVER. 

This stream has been described in the report on the flood of 1902, 
alread}' referred to. It contributes a large amount of water to the 
main artery of the Passaic below Dundee dam, and as the river channel 
at that point is overburdened under the present conditions because of 
lack of slope and numerous catchments, together Avith what is known 
as the Walliugton Bend, it increases very materially the damage caused 
by floods. 



40 



THP: PASSAIC FLOOD OF 1903. 



[xo. 92. 



The mo.st effectual remedy in the cii.se of Saddle River floods is that 
of construction of tlood catchments. No studies have been made of 
the situation in the Saddle River drainage area, but a superficial inspec- 
tion of the basin shows that opportunities for the construction of flood- 
catchment reservoirs are not luimerous. 

srMM.\RY OF ri,OOT)-tA'l'CH.MEXT PRO.IECTS. 

By following- the plans described in the preceding pages absolute 
flood catchments may be provided above Little Falls on the Passaic 
Basin for 551.7 square miles, leaving onl}' 221.2 square miles from 
which flood run-off would flow immediately. The accomplishment of 
this would involve the construction of Pompton reservoir, which would 
withhold all flood waters from the northern tributaries. It would 
leave unprovided ft)r 2<>.2 square miles on the Rockaway. 71.7 square 
miles on the Whippan}-, 46.2 square miles on the upper Passaic, and 
83.7 square miles tributary to the Central Basin and not included above. 

Leaving Pompton reservoir out of consideration, and conserving 
flood run-off' on the Ramapo, Wanacjue. and Pequanac rivers, there 
would be absolute flood catchment up to a 12-inch run-off over 494.8 
square miles above Little Falls. This would leave 278.1 square miles 
unprovided for. the run-ofl' fi"om which would not overburden the 
channel in the lower valle3% provided, of course, that channel were 
improved to a maximum carrying capacity. 

PREFERABLE RESERVOIR SITES. 

The following table and discussion of pi-eferable sites for flood pre- 
vention ai"e taken from the report of the engineering committee of the 
northern New Jersey flood commission: 

Table sliowing detailed fact-i regarding pus><ihle reserroir sites on Passaic drainage tiasin. 



Reservoir. 



Ramapo 

Waiia(jiU' 

Newfoundland . 

Rockaway 

Milliiif^ton . 

Great Piece 

Mountain View 

Do 

Do 

Do 



Area of 
water- 
shed. 


Area of 
reser- 
voir. 


Height 
of dam. 


Length 
of dam. 


Sq. mi. 


Sq. mi. 


Feel. 


Fret. 


140 


2.8 


65 


1,700 


83 


2.1 


60 


1,200 


52 


1.8 


40 


430 


114 


4.6 


28 


470 


56 


15.8 


25 


220 


773 


37 


21 


1,500 


380 


13.4 


42 


2,150 


380 


13.9 


44 


2,380 


380 


14.3 


46 


2,470 


380 


17.4 


60 


3,000 



Eleva- Storage, 
tion of water- 
flow line. shed. 



Feet. 
280 
275 
780 
520 
245 
178.5 
202 
204 
206 
220 



Inches. 
5.5 



8 
6 
31 
('9 
8 
9 

10 
17 



Storage 
capacity. 



Total cost. 



Million c.f. 
1,768 
1,491 
966 
1,565 I 
4,060 
8,950 j 
7,200 
7,900 ' 
8,700 
15,000 



$900, 000 
1, 000, 000 
1, 800, 000 
600, 000 
370, 000 
2, 625, 000 
3, 340, 000 
3, 460, 000 
3, 590, 000 
5, 260, 000 



n Including water discliargcd Ihrniigh fixed openings, in a flood simihir to that of October, 1903. 
Maximum <liscliargc, 12,000 cubic feet per second. 



lei'';htiin.] 



PREVENTIVE MEASURES. 



41 



With the exception of the Millington reservoir site where the cost of the dam is a 
small factor, the elevation of flow line in the various reservoirs which determines 
the capacity was fixed so as to afford an approximate storage equal to a run-off of 
about 8 inches from the drainage area above each dam site. This amount is some- 
what in excess of the run-off for th(i flood of October, 1903. It was found imprac- 
ticable on the Rockaway reservoir site to provide for a storage greater than 6 inches. 
On the Wanaque the amount which can he stored falls slightly under 8 inches, while 
on the Ramapo it is possible to obtain only oi inches, by reason of the fact tliat with 
a greater storage capacity the slack water would reach into New York State. The 
economical height for a dam at the lower end of the Great Piece Meadow, if such 
dam is provided with fixed discharge openings Avhich will carry a maximum out- 
flow of 12,000 cubic feet per second, will provide a reservoir which will dispose of a 
run-off of 9 inches on the drainage area above. 

The following comliinations of reservoir sites, with their respective drainage 
areas, proportional storage, and estimated costs, give the facts necessary for final 
deductions: 



Site. 



Ramapo 

Wanaque 

Pequanac 

Rockaway 

Total ... 

Ramapo 

Wanaque 

Rockaway . 

Millington 

Total ... 

Great Piece . . . 
Mountain View 




2, 625, 000 
3, 340, 000 



The necessity to retard the flow of or provide storage for approximately 380 square 
miles of highland drainage area has been determined after careful study, and there 
has been deduced an amount which may safely be expected to represent the maxi- 
mum for the highest floods. When the highland tributaries are sulflciently checked 
the natural storage on Great Piece Meadow in its effect upon flood control becomes 
more apparent. Our investigations show that the holding back of the flo(Ml flow — 
that is, 8 inches run-off on approximately 380 square miles of flashy drainage area 
above Great Piece Meadow— is necessary to reduce the discharge in the river through 
the city of Paterson to 14,000 cubic feet per second for a flood similar to that of 1903. 

From the foregoing table, in which different reservoir projects are compared, it 
is seen that only the reservoirs designated as Great Piece and Mountain View will 
fulfill the requirements within a reasonable limit of cost. It is also shown that 
a combination of any other available sites would involve the expenditure of more 
money for their construction and the control of less tributary drainage area than is 
fulfilled bv the demands of the Passaic drainage basin. We are therefore brought to 



42 THE PASSAIC FLOOD OF 1903. [no. 92. 

the conclusion that only two of the projects above set forth will be effective. First, 
the construction of a regulating dam on the main stream above Little Falls, which we 
have called the "Great Piece" Meadow Keservoir, and second, the building of a dam 
at Mountain View across Pompton River. The relative cost of these reservoirs, ton- 
structed for flood control exclusively, is $2, 625, 000 for that on Great Piece ^Meadow 
and $3, 340, 000 for the Mountain View site. Details of these estimates are as follows: 

Estimate of cost of Great Piece Reservoir, darn at Little Falls. 

[Elevation of flow line, 178.5 feet. Storage and dispo.sal of 9 inches collected."] 

Eartli excavation, 17,600 cubic yards, at 35 cents S6, 160 

Rock excavation, 8,800 cubic yards, at $2 17, 600 

Rubble masonry, 29,100 cubic yards, at $5 145, 500 

Ashlar masonry, 1,800 cubic yards, at |12 21, 600 

Facework of rubble masonry, 2,850 square yards, at SI. 50 4, 275 

Concrete masonry, 250 cubic yards, at $6 1, 500 

Slope paving, 300 cubic yards, at $2 600 

Crushed stone, 150 cubic yards, at $1 .50 225 

60-inch cast-iron pipe in place, .360 tons, at $35 ] 2, 600 

Relocation of railroads, Erie, 5 miles, at $20,000; Delaware, Lackawanna 

and Western, 4.5 miles, at $40,000 280, 000 

Relocation of highways 170, 000 

Real estate: 

Above Mountain View 500, 000 

Additional for village of Sinsjai- 100, 000 

22,000 acres, at $50 1, 100, 000 

2, 360, 000 
Add for engineering and contingencies 240, 000 

2, 600, 000 
Protection of pipe lines, Newark and Jersey City 25, 000 

2, 625, 000 
The effectiveness of a reservoir built upon the lines jiroposed in the case of Great 
Piece Meadow depends upon the adjustment of outflow so that the channel below 
will not 1)6 overborne, while at the same' time sufficient storage capacity is afforded 
to hold temporarily the water which enters above the dam in amount greater than 
the carrying capacity of the outflow apertures. The dam across Passaic River al)ove 
Little Falls would be provide<l with apertures which would discharge 12,000 cubic 
feet per second under the maximum head in the storage basin. As the Hood rises 
these apertures would discharge a constantly increasing amount of water to the 
maximum, and for a considerable time thereafter the maxinunn would be main- 
tained, the discharge decreasing after the flood according t(j the height of water 
remaining in the reservoir. 

"Includes water di.scliarged through lixcd (ii)enings for a flood similar to that of October, 1903. 
Maximum flow, 12,000 cubic feet per second. 



LEiGHTox.] PREVENTIVE MEASURES. 43 

Estimated coM, of Mountain View Reservoir. 

[Elevation of flow line, 202 feet. Storage of 8 inches on watershed.] 

Earth excavation: 

Stripping dam base, 83,500 cubic yards, at $0.30 $25, 050 

Core wall trench, 24,900 cubic yards, at $1 24, 900 

Rock excavation, 10, 100 cubic yards, at $2 20, 200 

Rock till in dam, 197,000 cubic yards, at $1.25 246, 250 

Rubble masonry, 23,200 cubic yards, at $5 1 16, 000 

Concrete, 30,000 cubic yards, at $6 180, 000 

Gate chambers and tunnels 65, 000 

Reconstruction of highways 142, 400 

Reconstruction of railroads 815, 000 

Real estate 1,360,000 

2, 994, 800 
Engineering and contingencies 325, 200 

3, 320, 000 
Protection of Newark pipe line 20, 000 

Total cost 3,340,000 

[Same for elevation of flow line, 204 feet. Storage of 9 inches on watershed.] 

Earth excavation: 

Stripping dam base, 85,200 cubic yards, at $0.30 $25, 5<30 

Core waU trench, 26,000 cubic yards, at $1 26, 000 

Rock excavation, 10,600 cubic yards, at $2 21, 200 

Rock fill in dam, 214,000 cubic yards, at $1.25 267, 500 

Rubble masonry, 24,500 cubic yards, at $5 122, 500 

Concrete, 30,500 cubic yards, at $6 183, 000 

Gate chambers and tunnels 65, 000 

Reconstruction of highways 142, 400 

Reconstruction of railroads 815, 000 

Real estate 1, 435, 000 

3, 103, 160 
Engineering and contingencies 336, 840 

3, 440, 000 
Protection of Newark pipe line 20, 000 

Total cost 3, 460, 000 

The final recommendation of the committee involves the consideration of two 
projects for flood storage, one on Great Piece INIeadow and the other above Mountain 
View on the Pompton. In making such recommendations the conunittee is of the 
opinion that it nuist take into account matters of engineering policy with regard to 
future needs and contingencies, as well as the bare necessities of the present. 

If there were none other than the single problem of prevention the committee 
would advise the construction of the reservoir on Great Piece Meadow by reason of 
its smaller probable cost and its equal efficiency. It is plain, however, that there are 
many important features of public policy involved in the subject at hand. Popula- 
tion in the valley of the Passaic is developing so rapidly that in only a few years the 
present sources of water supply will be inadequate. The whole suliject of water 
suj)ply for northern New Jersey demands immediate consideration, and it would not 
be wise to take up the matter of prevention of flood damage in the Passaic without 



44 THE PASSAIC FLOOD OF 1903. [no. 92. 

basing the value of every project upon its adaptability for use in future water-supply 
needs. 

By expending $2,600,000 a great reservoir could be constructed upon Great Piece 
^Meadow Avhich could not be adapted for any purposes except to regulate floods; it 
would stand in season and out of season a huge feature of the valley and entirelj' use- 
less and inojierative save on the occasion of high water. However great might be 
the needs of the inhabitants of the Passaic Valley for a conserved water supjily, the 
construction on the meadows, representing an enormous expenditure, would furnish 
no solution of the pro1)lem. It would admit of no enlargement for water-supply stor- 
age and would be availal)le for no purpose except flood regulation. 

When we consider the Mountain View project, however, we And that as a measure 
for the prevention of flood damages it fulfills all the requirements and provides in 
addition all the possibilities and advantages demanded inevitably in the near future. 
The Mountain View site is an ideal one for the reservoir, and its initial development 
for flood catchment does not involve the expenditure of a dollar that woul<l be lost 
in the develo})ment of the basin to greater capacities for water supply. From its 
lowest level, at 202 feet above tide, t(j its maximum capacity, at a level of 220, there 
would be no dejireciation. Every dollar spent in the initial construction would be 
effective in the maximum development. 

The probable cost of ^Mountain View reservoir, estimated at $3,340,000, exceeds 
that of Great Piece by $700,000. It is realized that to many persons this margin 
may seem very wide. Let us consider briefly just what it really represents. 

Suppose, for example, that the Great Piece project is constructed at a cost of 
$2,600,000. After the elapse of a few years it will be necessary to provide additional 
storage in the Passaic highlands for water supply or the maintenance of water ])ower. 
The ^Mountain View reservoir, or its equivalent in capacity and cost, will then be 
necessary. The situation will then be as follows: By constructing the Great Piece 
reservoir in preference to the ^lountain View for flood catchment, $700,000 would be 
saved. We can consider that this amount might be expended to pay a part of the 
cost of additional conservation above referred to. If, on the other hand, Mountain 
View had been constructed, there would have been paid on the final cost of conserv- 
ance the sum of $3,340,000, which," as stated in previous pages, would also have 
effected flood relief. There would then be the difference between $2,600,000 and 
$700,000, or $1,900,000, which represents the actual loss which would accrue by 
reason of the construction of Great Piece reservoir. 

The engineering committee, after j^resenting the merits of both Great Piece Meadow 
and Mountain View projects, therefore recommends the adoption of the latter in 
spite of its greater cost, because it is believed that in the end the construction of the 
Great Piece project would involve an expenditure not warranted by public economy 
or general expediency. 

GEN^ERAIj CO:NCIiUSIOXS. 

1. Great flood.>^ in tho Pai^saie Basin arise only after a specially vio- 
lent precipitation. 

2. Under present conditions floods may be expected at frequent 
intervals. 

3. A part of the damaoe along the lower valle}- is the result of 
encroachments on the part of individuals and public and private 
corporations. 

4. The channel in tho lower valley may )>e improved at certain 
points by straightening it and judiciously making cut-oHs. 



LEIGHTOX.] 



GENERAL CONCLUSIONS. 45 



5. Without the construction of numerous levees the lower valle}' 
channel can not be nmde to carry g-reat flood waters without daniau'e. 

H. Innnunity from floods can be efl'ected only by the construction 
of catchment reservoirs in the highlands or levees in the lowlands. 

7. Levee construction would involve more damaoe than is now 
caused by floods, and the cost thereof would be prohibitive. 

8. Flood catchment reservoirs may be constructed economically 
and provide storai>-e to compensate for the dry-season flow, thereby 
maintaining- water power at Paterson, Passaic, and other points, and 
pro\iding for municipal water supply in the future. 



INDEX. 



Page. 
Arph street liridse. I'atcrson. destruotion of 27 

Boattic's dam, flood flow at lG-17 

flood period at 9 

view of l(i 

Bridges, destruction of 26-27 

Capacity of streams, increase in 28 

Central Basin, damage in 24 

flood in, descent of 14-15 

Cliarlo.tteburg, rainfall at 11, 12 

Chatliam, flood period at 10 

Chester, rainfall at 11 

Cranberry Pond, dam at, failure of 24 

Damages, discussion of 23-28 

Darlington, reservoir site at 33 

Dixons Pond, reservoir site at 37 

Dover, rainfall at 11,12 

Drought, relation of rainfall to 12 

Dundee dam, flood flow over 17-22 

flood flow over, diagram showing 20 

flood period at 9 

floods at, comparison of, figure showing. 18 
Kast .Jersey Water Company, damage at 

pumping station of 25-26 

Elizabeth, rainfall at 11 

E.ssex Fells, rainfall at 11, 12 

Flood, descent of 14-22 

period of 9-10 

prevention of 28-44 

Flood damage, plates showing 26, 28 

Floods, general conclusions concerning 44-45 

Great Passaic Swamp, reservoir site at 38-39 

Great Piece reservoir, co.st of, estimate of . . 42 

Greenwood Lake, use of 84 

Hanover, rainfall at 11 

Hebrew quarter, Paterson, devastation in, 

plate showing 28 

Highland tributar;es, damages along 23-25 

descent of flood in 14-15 

Hotel, wreck of, plate showing 26 

Little Falls, dam at, view of 16 

damage at 2.5-26 

flood flow at 16-17 

flood period at 9 

rainfall at 12 

Longwood Valley, Jeservoir site in 37 

Lower Longwood, reservoir site near 38 

Lower Valley, damage in 25-28 

improvements in, discussion of 29-31 

Ludlum Steel and Iron Company, water 

front of 24 

Macopin dam, flood flow at l.vii; 

flood period at 10 

Main street bridge, Paterson, destruction 

of 27 



Page 

Midvale, proposed reservoir near 34 

Mill district, Paterson, effects of flood in, 

plate showing 26 

Millington, reservoir site near 38-39, 40 

Mountain View, reservoir site at 31-33, 40 

Mountain View reservoir, cost of. estimate 

of 43 

New York City, rainfall at 11,13 

Newark, rainfall at 11,12,13 

Newark water department, information 

furnished by 16 

Newell, F. H., letter of transmittal by 7 

Newfoundland, reservoir site near 36, 40 

Nigger Pond, dam at, failure of 24 

Oakland, reservoir site near 34 

Obstructions to flow of Passaic River, dis- 
cussion of 29-30 

Old Boonton, flood period at 10 

Passaic, damage at 27-28 

inundated lands at, plate showing 28 

Passaic Basin, reservoir sites in upper 38-39 

storage facilities in, efltect of 11 

Passaic River, bridge over, ])late showing.. 28 

flood flow of 17-22 

diagram showing 20 

flood period on 10 

floods on, comparison of, diagram show- 
ing 18 

flow of, obstructions to 29-30 

Passaic Valley, rainfall in 11 , 12 

Paterson, damage at 26-27 

flood district of, plate showing 24 

flood-water lines in residence district of, 

plate showing 16 

Hebrew quarter in. devastation in, plate 

showing 28 

mill district, effects of flood in, plate 

showing 26 

rainfall at 11 , 12 

residence district, flood-water lines in, 

plate showing 16 

views in n;, 24, 26, 28 

Pequanac Basin, reservoir sites in 35-36, 40, 41 

Peqiianac River, damage along 24 

flood flow of 16 

flood period on lo 

Petersburg, reservoir site near 37 

Plainfield, rainfall at 11 

Pompton Lake, dry bed of, plate sliowing. . 24 

reservoir site at 33-35 

Pompton Lakes, damage at 24 

Pompton Lakes dam, plate showing 24 

Pompton Plains, damage at 24 

highest water at 10 

47 



48 



INDEX. 



Page. 

Pompton reservoir, (\iscussion of 31-£3 

Powerville, reservoir site near o7 

Precipitation, amount of 11-14 

Prevention of floods, discussion of 28-45 

Rainfall, amount of 11-14 

reUit ion of drought to 12 

Ramapo River, damages along 23-24 

flood on, time of - 9 

Ramapo Valley, reservoir sites in 33-31, 40, 41 

Reservoir sites, comparison of 40-44 

Reservoirs for preventing Hoods, di.scussion 

of 28,31-40 

Residence district, Pater.son. flood-water 

lines in. plate .showing Ki 

Ringwood, rainfall at 11, 12 

Riugwood Creek, reservoir site on 3.5 

River street, Paterson, view of 26 

River Vale, rainfall at 11, 12 

Rockaway Basin, reservoir sites on .. 37-38,40,41 
Roekaway River, flood period on 10 



Page. 

Saddle River, reservoir sites on 39-40 

Sherrerd. M. R.. aid by 1.5 

Smith, G. W., quoted on changes in chan- 
nel at Little Falls 25 

South Orange, rainfall at 11,12 

Splitrock Pond, reservoir site on 38 

Spruce street, Paterson, washout at, iilate 

showing 26 

Stickle Pond, proposed reservior at 36 

Stony Brook, reservoir site on 37 

Storage reservoirs for preventing fiood.s, dis- 
cussion of 28,31-40 

Streams, capacity of, increase in 28 

Vermeule, C. C, quoted on Pompton reser- 
voir 31-32 

Wanaque Ba.sin, reservoir sites in 34-35, 40, 41 

West Street Bridge, Paterson, destruction 

of 26 

West Brook, reservoir site on 35 



o 



LIBRARY CATALOGUE SLIPS. 

[Blount each slip iii)on u .separate card, j)lacing the subject at the top oi the 
second slip. The name of the series should not be repeated on the .series 
card, but the additional niuubers should be added, as received, to the tirst 
entry.] 



Leighton, Marshall Ora. 

. . . The Passaic flood of 1903, by ^Marshall Ora 
Leighton. Washington, Gov't print, off., 1904. 

4Sp.,ll. illus., 7 1)1. 2V^"". (r. S. (iedlugical survey. Water-supply 
and irrigation ])a[)er no. 92. ) 

Subject series 31, General hydrographic investigations, S. 

"Continuation of "Water-supiily and irrigation jjaper no. 88, by G. B. Hoi- 
lister and ]M. (). Leitihton." 



Leighton, Marshall Ora. 

. . . The Passaic flood of 1903, by jMarshall Ora 
Leighton. \A"ashington, Gov't print, off., 1904. 

48 p., 1 1. illus., 7 pi. 23i'="'. [U. S. Geological survey. "\Vater-su]i])ly 
and irrigation pajier no. 92. ) 

Subject series 31, General hydrographic investigations, S. 

'• Continuation of Water-supply and irrigation paper no. 88, by G. B. Hol- 
lister and 31. 0. Leiii^hton.'" 



U. S. Geological survey. 

i A\'ater-supply and irrigation -papers. 

■^ no. 92. Leighton, M. O. The Passaic flood of 1903. 
1904. 



J U. S. Dept. of the Interior. 

I see also 

^ U. S. Geological survey. 

IKK 92—04 4 



Seriks K— Pumping Water. 

WS ]. l'\imping water for irrigation, by Herbert M. Wilson. 1896. 57 pp., 9 pis. 
WS 8. Windmills for irrigation, by E. C. Murphy. 1897. 49 pp., 8 pis. 
WS 14. Tests of pumps and water lifts used in irrigation, by O. P. H(X)d. 1898. <u rp., 1 pi. 
WS 20. Experiments with windmills, by T. O. Perry. 1899. 97 pp., 12 pis. 
WS 29. Wells and windmills in Nebraska, by E. II. Barbour. 1899. 85 pp., 27 pis. 
WS 41. The windmill; its efficiency and economic use, Pt. I, by E. C. Murphy. 1001. 72 pp., 14 pie. 
WS 42. The windmill, Pt. II (continuation of No. 41). 1901. 73-117 pp., IS-lfi pis. 
WS 91. Natural features and economic development of Sandusky, Maumee, Muskingum, and Miami 
drainage areas in Ohio, by B. R. Elynn and M. S. Flyuu. 1904. — pp. 

Series L— Quality of Water. 

WS 3. Sewage irrigation, by G.W. Rafter. 1897. 100 pp., 4 pis. 
WS 22. Sewage irrigation, Pt. II, by «. W. Rafter. 1899. 100 pp., 7 pis. 
WS 72. Sewage pollution near New York City, by M. O. Leighton. 1902. 75 pp.. 8 pis. 
WS 76. Flow of rivers near New York City, by II. A. Pres.sey. 1903. 108 pp., 13 pis. 
WS79. Normal and polluted waters in northeastern United States, by M. O. Leighton. 1903. 192 pp., 
1.^ pis. 

Series M— General Hydrographic Inve.sti«ations. 

WS 56. Methods of stream measurement. 1901. 51pp., 12 pis. 

WS 64. Accuracy of stream measurements, by E. C. Murphy. 1902. 99 pp., 4 pis. 

WS 76. Observations on the flow of rivers in the vicinity of New York City, by H. A. Pressey. 1902. 

108 pp., 13 pis. 
WS 80. The relation of rainfall to run-off, by G. W. Rafter. 1903. 104 pp. 
WS81. California hydrography, by J. B. Lippincott. 1903. 488 pp., 1 pi. 

WS 88. The Passaic flood of 1902, by G. B. Hollister and M. O. Leighton. 1903. 50 pp., 1.'. pis. 
WS91. Natural features and economic development of the Sandusky, Maumee, Muskingum, and 

Miami drainage areas in Ohio, by B. H. Flynn and M. S. Flynu. 1904. — pp. 
WS 92. The Passaic flood of 1903, by M. O. Leighton. 1904. — pp., 7 pis. 

Series N— Water Power. 

WS 24. Water resources of State of New York, Pt. I, by G. W. Rafter. 1899. 92 pp., 13 pis. 

WS 26. Water resources of State of New York, Pt. II, by G. W. Rafter. 1899. 100-200 pp., 12 pis. 

WS 44. ftofiles of rivers, by Henry Gannett. 1901. 100 pp., 11 pis. 

WS 62. Hydrography of the Southern Appalachian Mountain region, Pt. I, by U. A. I^essey. 1902. 

95 pp., 25 pis. 
WS 63. Hydrography of the Southern Appalachian Mountain region, Pt. II, by H. A r- -v.— ^'x^^> 

96-190 pp., 26-44 pis. 
WS 6<>. Water powers of the State of Maine, by H. A. Pressey. 1902. 124 pp., 14 pis. 
[Continued on fourth page of cover.] 
iRii 92—3 



Series O— UNBERGRotn.T> Waters. 

WS 4. A reconnaissance in southeastern Washington, by I. C. Russell. 1897. 96 pp., 7 pis. 

WS 6. Underground waters of southwestern Kansas, by Erasmus Haworth. 1897. 6.5 pp., 12 pis. 

WS 7. Seepage waters of northern Utah, by Samuel Fortier. 1897. 50 pp., 3 pis. 

WS 12. Underground waters of southeastern Nebraska, by N. H. Darton. 1898. 66 pp., 21 pin. 

WS21. Wells of northern Indiana, by Frank Leverett. 1899. 82 pp., 2 pis. 

WS 26. Wellsof southern Indiana (continuation of No. 21), by Frank Leverett. 1899. 64 pp. 

WS 30. Water resources of the lower peninsula of Michigan, by A. C. Lane. 1899. 97 pp., 7 pis. 

WS 31. Lower Michigan mineral waters, by A. C. Lane. 1899. 97 pp., 4 pis. 

WS 34. Geology and water resources of a portion of southeastern South Dakota, by J. E. Todd. 1900. 

34 pp., 19 pis. 
WS 53. Geology and water resources of Nez Perces County, Idaho, Pt. I, by I. C. Russell. 1901. M 

pp., 10 pis. 
WS 54. Geology and water resources of Nez Peroes County, Idaho, Pt. II, by I. C. Russell. 1901. 

87-141 pp. 
WS 55. Geology and water resources of a portion of Yakima County, Wash., by G. O. Smith. 1901. 68 

pp., 7 pis. 
WS 57. Preliminary list of deep borings in the United States, Pt. I, by N. H. Darton. 1902. 60 pp. 
WS 59. Development and application of water in southern California, Pt. I, by J. B. Lippincott. 

1902. 95 pp., 11 pis. 
WS 60. Development and application of water in southern California, Pt. II, by J. B. Lippincott. 

1902. 96-140 pp. 
WS 61. Preliminary list of deep borings in the United States, Pt. II, by N. H. Darton. 1902. 67 pp. 
WS 67. The motions of underground waters, by C. S. Slichter. 1902. 106 pp., 8 pis. 
B 199. Geology and water resources of the Snake River Plains of Idaho, by I. C. Russell. 1902. 192 

pp., 25 pis. 
WS 77. Water resources of Molokai, Hawaiian Islands, by Waldemar Lindgren. 1903. 62 pp., 4 pis. 
WS 78. Preliminary report on artesian basins in southwestern Idaho and southeastern Oregon, by 

I. C. Russell. 1903. 52 pp., 2 pis. 
PP 17. Preliminary report on the geology and water resources of Nebraska west of the one hundred 

and third meridian, by N. H. Darton. 1903. 69 pp., 43 pis. 
WS 90. Geology and water resources of a part of the lower James River Valley, South Dakota, by J. E. 

Todd and C. M. Hall. 1904. — pp., 23 pis. 
The following papers also relate to this subject: Underground waters of Arkansas Valley in eastern 
Colorado, by G. K. Gilbert, in Seventeenth Annual, Pt. II; Preliminary report on artesian waters of 
a portion of the Dakotas, by N. H. Darton, in Seventeenth Annual, Pt. II; Water resources of Illi- 
nois, by Frank Leverett, in Seventeenth Annual, Pt. II; Water resources of Indiana and Ohio, by 
Frank Leverett, in Eighteenth Annual, Pt. IV; New developments in well boring and irrigation in 
eastern South Dakota, by N. H. Darton, in Eighteenth Annual, Pt. IV; Rock waters of Ohio, by 
Edward Orton, in Nineteenth Annual, Pt. IV: Artesian well prospects in Atlantic Coa.stal Plain 
region, by N, H. Darton, Bulletin No. 138. 

Series P— Hydrographic Pr(*re88 Reports. 

Progress reports may be found In the following publications: For 1888-89, Tenth Annual, Pt. II; 
for 1889-90, Eleventh Annual, Pt. II; for 1890-91, Twelfth Annual, Pt. II; for 1891-92, Thirteenth Annual, 
Pt. Ill; for 1893-94. Bulletin No. 131; for 1895, Bulletin No. 140; for 1896, Eighteenth Annual, Pt. IV, 
WS 11; for 1897, Nineteenth Annual, Pt. IV, WS 15, 16: for 1898, Twentieth Annual, Pt. IV, WS 27, 28; 
for 1899, Twenty-flrst Annual, Pt. IV, WS 35-39; for 1900, Twenty-second Annual, Pt. IV, WS 47-62; for 
1901, WS 66, 66, 76; for 1902, WS 82-85. 

Correspondence should be addressed to 

Thk Director, 

UnITKD iSTATKS CiEO LOGICAL SURVKV, 

VVASillNGTON, D. C. 

IRR 92—4 



r. P n . Atir.. '05. 



